Page 5 of 6
Re: Thank You Mo
Posted: June 28 26, 4:16 pm
by Spider John
Just read where he has sent forth the clarion call for patience.
Re: Thank You Mo
Posted: July 7 26, 7:54 am
by cardsfantx
Wonder if this was a shot to Dewitt/St Louis…
“The one thing you have to realize about the Los Angeles Angels is they do have resources,” he said. “From (owner Arte Moreno) to the market size, this is a place that could be a very, very special place. … There are many franchises in the game of baseball that cannot do that. They have tradeoffs. They have to make a decision: If I’m going to give you $20MM for your infrastructure, that’s $20MM less for your payroll. This place is different.”
Re: Thank You Mo
Posted: July 7 26, 8:05 am
by GeddyWrox
cardsfantx wrote: ↑July 7 26, 7:54 am
Wonder if this was a shot to Dewitt/St Louis…
“The one thing you have to realize about the Los Angeles Angels is they do have resources,” he said. “From (owner Arte Moreno) to the market size, this is a place that could be a very, very special place. … There are many franchises in the game of baseball that cannot do that. They have tradeoffs. They have to make a decision: If I’m going to give you $20MM for your infrastructure, that’s $20MM less for your payroll. This place is different.”
Yep, that's a shot.
Re: Thank You Mo
Posted: July 7 26, 8:10 am
by dmarx114
Reinforces that DeWitt was always the problem. Unfortunately, Mo had a few bad drafts in a row, and that's on him.
Interesting that there seemed to be some level of a falling out.
Re: Thank You Mo
Posted: July 7 26, 8:24 am
by jagtrader
GeddyWrox wrote: ↑July 7 26, 8:05 am
cardsfantx wrote: ↑July 7 26, 7:54 am
Wonder if this was a shot to Dewitt/St Louis…
“The one thing you have to realize about the Los Angeles Angels is they do have resources,” he said. “From (owner Arte Moreno) to the market size, this is a place that could be a very, very special place. … There are many franchises in the game of baseball that cannot do that. They have tradeoffs. They have to make a decision: If I’m going to give you $20MM for your infrastructure, that’s $20MM less for your payroll. This place is different.”
Yep, that's a shot.
Oh [expletive] that guy. No one told him he had to extend Mikolas into eternity. I wouldn’t let him spend either after his decisions.
Re: Thank You Mo
Posted: July 7 26, 8:49 am
by Popeye_Card
Angels budget for infrastructure is essentially $0. The contrast in how the Dodgers invest in their brand and fan experience versus how the Angels approach it is very apparent.
Re: Thank You Mo
Posted: July 7 26, 9:32 am
by Spider John
GeddyWrox wrote: ↑July 7 26, 8:05 am
cardsfantx wrote: ↑July 7 26, 7:54 am
Wonder if this was a shot to Dewitt/St Louis…
“The one thing you have to realize about the Los Angeles Angels is they do have resources,” he said. “From (owner Arte Moreno) to the market size, this is a place that could be a very, very special place. … There are many franchises in the game of baseball that cannot do that. They have tradeoffs. They have to make a decision: If I’m going to give you $20MM for your infrastructure, that’s $20MM less for your payroll. This place is different.”
Yep, that's a shot.
Also, the truth, but he still owns some of the blame.
Re: Thank You Mo
Posted: July 7 26, 10:01 am
by GeddyWrox
Spider John wrote: ↑July 7 26, 9:32 am
GeddyWrox wrote: ↑July 7 26, 8:05 am
cardsfantx wrote: ↑July 7 26, 7:54 am
Wonder if this was a shot to Dewitt/St Louis…
“The one thing you have to realize about the Los Angeles Angels is they do have resources,” he said. “From (owner Arte Moreno) to the market size, this is a place that could be a very, very special place. … There are many franchises in the game of baseball that cannot do that. They have tradeoffs. They have to make a decision: If I’m going to give you $20MM for your infrastructure, that’s $20MM less for your payroll. This place is different.”
Yep, that's a shot.
Also, the truth, but he still owns some of the blame.
Yep, fully agree.
Re: Thank You Mo
Posted: July 7 26, 10:02 am
by ghostrunner
dmarx114 wrote: ↑July 7 26, 8:10 am
Reinforces that DeWitt was always the problem.
I hate to defend the billionaires, but this is a wild conclusion. Unless the idea is that they had some specific negative influence we can point to on trades or acquisitions.
Re: Thank You Mo
Posted: July 7 26, 11:15 am
by Popeye_Card
ghostrunner wrote: ↑July 7 26, 10:02 am
dmarx114 wrote: ↑July 7 26, 8:10 am
Reinforces that DeWitt was always the problem.
I hate to defend the billionaires, but this is a wild conclusion. Unless the idea is that they had some specific negative influence we can point to on trades or acquisitions.
All of Mo’s moves since the attempts at signing Heyward/Price had the distinct flavor of minimized business risk. It really handcuffs you as a GM if you can’t sign a player like an Aaron Nola (who they reportedly pursued) when you know that there’s no chance they will sign below the owners’ “puke point” on years or dollars.