Xx srs bsns xX
Well-Known Member
...
So, umm... welcome back Josh? I guess? Because... umm, Rangers?
It's not costing the Rangers any players, won't affect the development of any players, it's at a bargain-basement price, and it sets the LAAAA Angels back. Plus, with Yu out they aren't doing anything this year. Why not.
It's not setting them back anything. They were already on the hook to pay him $83M to stay away from the team. They're now paying $76M to do the same thing. We just saved them $7M.
As for how it will play out with Texas, part II, that's anyone's guess. But the Angels are $7M richer than they were a week ago.
they're paying a guy to play for a division rival, and having that contract on the books affects what they can do.
You're missing the point though. That contract was on their books whether we make the deal or not. The Angels hurt themselves when they signed him. We didn't do anything to stick it to them by re-acquiring him. They were either going to spend $83M for him to not play for them or $76M. They now have to pay less. It helps them.
The only way this deal hurts the Angels is if Josh somehow reverts back to a .300/30 HR guy who truly helps the Rangers in the division race. But if he is the same Josh that hurt the Rangers during the last month of his time in Texas and the one who stunk in LA, then it's the Angels who will be winning in the end.
If you bought a gourmet meal for $100 and it quickly turned to rotting garbage which stunk up your house, would you rather let it sit there or would you let someone take it off your hands for $5, accept $95 in loss, be rid of the garbage, and then use $5 on a Subway sandwich?
Not if there was a chance I could still get $20 or $30 out of the meal, no.
You're missing the point though. That contract was on their books whether we make the deal or not. The Angels hurt themselves when they signed him. We didn't do anything to stick it to them by re-acquiring him. They were either going to spend $83M for him to not play for them or $76M. They now have to pay less. It helps them.
The only way this deal hurts the Angels is if Josh somehow reverts back to a .300/30 HR guy who truly helps the Rangers in the division race. But if he is the same Josh that hurt the Rangers during the last month of his time in Texas and the one who stunk in LA, then it's the Angels who will be winning in the end.
Yes, yes you are missing the point. The Angels were going to be paying for Josh Hamilton NOT to play LF for them either way. Do you understand that? In one scenario, they pay the FULL amount for him to stay away. They then have to also pay someone else. In the current scenario, the Angels are paying slightly LESS for him to stay away. They now have some savings to pay a different player.
Scenario 1: Angels pay Josh Hamilton $83M to NOT play.
Scenario 2: Angels pay Josh Hamilton $76M to NOT play.
It's pretty simple.
The angels have lost this based on PR alone. Production from Hamilton isn't likely going to matter in the end. They look really really bad in this, and people are already saying Arte needs to consider selling the team after so many massive fuck ups. The Angels are losers in this pretty much all the way around. Sunk cost is sunk cost and I highly doubt they are excited about saving 7 million dollars.
Oh, from a PR standpoint you are absolutely 100% right. They look like complete losers here. Moreno and DiPoto are coming off as clueless and heartless assholes.
I was talking merely from a baseball standpoint. We didn't set the Angels back by making this trade. They only save $7M, so it's not a huge help to them. But either way they weren't getting another inning out of Josh, so they're just doing it for a little less now.
The Angels can't keep a healthy player on the DL, if I'm not mistaken.