End of the line for Q?

by elricsi on Apr 26, 2009 1:55 PM PDT Comment 47 comments

I loved him while he was in his prime, but with so few spots on the active roster for backup position players, I don't think we can carry him anymore.

The best of use of Q was as a backup at the 4 corners, and platoon player versus LHP. He was particularly useful when some of our starters at the 4C were LHP who struggled against lefties. His OPS versus LHP for the last 3 years was 764, so he did OK, but it is downhill from here. BP projects him for a 253/306/349 line this year. He only hit .282 against lefties last year, and that was an empty 282 with 0 HR.

But now we have plenty of good players to back up in the OF and at 3B, so when Vlad is back I think Wood has to stay and Q has to go.

Poll

What should we do with Q when our starting hitters are all healthy again?

DFA, it he agrees to go to Salt Lake, then fine.

64 votes

Keep him and send Wood back to SLC to play everyday

26 votes

Trade for bag of balls

42 votes

Hell, we need more Q! Bump UP his playing time.

31 votes

163 votes | Poll has closed

This Fan-Post is authored by an independent fan. Tell us what you think and how you feel.

0 recs | Comment 47 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Nooo...

This is blasphemy.
Q is the reason the Angels have any wins at all this year.
Open your eyes and see the light.

by lackey41 on Apr 26, 2009 2:04 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Who is going to be the back up 1st baseman then Q-hater?

by 44FAN on Apr 26, 2009 3:25 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

This.

by neochoa on Apr 26, 2009 3:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Morales.

Q for 1B! At least he’s pretty good at catching balls, which is sort of the first baseman’s job.

Let's do this for Nick Adenhart, Courtney Stewart, and Henry Pearson.

by AlanFalcon on Apr 27, 2009 1:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Trade for a bag of balls

but only if they’re real high quality ones. None of that little league shit, or “official league” branded stuff. No flexiballs, either.

by Caseys Kiss of Death on Apr 26, 2009 3:26 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

remember the guy who was traded for bats

Rest in Peace Adenhart

by princeton11loveshalos on Apr 26, 2009 5:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

john odom?

he died….:(

RIP Nick Adenhart 4/9/09

by vlad IS my man on Apr 26, 2009 5:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

he killed himself

he was so depressed after that trade that he never recovered. RIP

RIP Nick. We will miss you!

by KingF15h on Apr 27, 2009 5:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Actually he had drug issues that were aggravated by the embarrassment if the trade

This bullpen collapses faster than the Austro-Hungarian Empire

by HaloDutch on Apr 27, 2009 6:05 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

true,

but the trade didn’t help. It made him slip into an even deeper depression that lead to him killing himself. So what I said was technically correct…

RIP Nick. We will miss you!

by KingF15h on Apr 27, 2009 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

LOL, remember when they used to think the baseballs were juiced

by SCHalo on Apr 26, 2009 10:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hahaha

I know, how did any of us fall for that? It’s like a bad joke you can’t say with a straight face, and yet all of the media (and the public) believed it for years.

by Brody on Apr 27, 2009 5:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I wonder how fabricated this was then

CLEVELAND Jan 3, 2007 (AP)— A company that uses computer imaging claims baseballs had a larger rubberized core and a synthetic rubber ring in 1998, including the ball Mark McGwire hit for his 70th homer.
Universal Medical Systems Inc. said Wednesday that with the assistance of Drs. Avrami S. Grader and Dr. Philip M. Halleck from The Center for Quantitative Imaging at Penn State, it took images of 1998 baseballs.
“Examining the CT images of Mark McGwire’s 70th home run ball one can clearly see the synthetic ring around the core or ‘pill’ of the baseball,” UMS president David Zavagno said. “While Mark McGwire may or may not have used illegal steroids, the evidence shows his ball under the governing body of the league was juiced.”

HEY EVERYONE LET’S BLAME THE INANIMATE OBJECT!!!

by Caseys Kiss of Death on Apr 27, 2009 11:27 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

So, the deadball era never happened?

I don’t understand what you’re trying to say.

Witty .sig goes here.

by scareduck on Apr 27, 2009 2:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

No, not at all

I’m just saying that when home run records were falling left and right and everyone knew exactly what was going on, all the league offices would do is spin it off as “HAHAHA, THIS IS CRAZY, ISN’T IT GUYS, I GUESS SOMEONE’S BEEN PUMPIN’ EXTRA JUICE INTO THE BALLS THIS YEAR, BOY, WE’LL MAKE SURE TO GET TO THE BOTTOM OF THIS AND LET YA KNOW!!!”

::selig backs away from mic slowly, nervous, and red in face::

by Caseys Kiss of Death on Apr 28, 2009 2:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

but the balls were juiced...

I’m with scareduck, I’m confused. The players were on steroids, yes, but the balls were juiced as well. It’s been proven by independent studies.

RIP Nick. We will miss you!

by KingF15h on Apr 28, 2009 5:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

...

no one is saying they weren’t.

My point is that the league office, while everyone else in the world knew exactly why McGwire and Co. were launching balls out at a record pace, was trying to pretend that juiced balls were the reason, and not just a reason. Their “let’s just ignore the problem” philosophy of the time focused on trying to shift focus to blaming the baseballs rather than address steroids, which was an absurdity. This isn’t to say the baseballs weren’t juiced…but just that it was hilarious that MLB was trying to insist that they were the real culprit behind the falling home run records.

by Caseys Kiss of Death on Apr 28, 2009 11:24 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

Panther

by Brody on Apr 28, 2009 7:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ah, I see

right you are sir

RIP Nick. We will miss you!

by KingF15h on Apr 29, 2009 5:58 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The official theme song of this thread:

“When I Ruled the World”

by LazorkoRules on Apr 26, 2009 4:54 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Q had a prime?

by snowhor on Apr 26, 2009 6:21 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs

+ 1

Do it for Nick '09

by BryanHarvey'sMoustache on Apr 26, 2009 6:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yup

July 24th – August 14th, 2004.

by Caseys Kiss of Death on Apr 27, 2009 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Damn

I remember thinking how good he was going to be and how disappointed I was when I turned on the game (they were in Tampa) and they announced he was injured. strained oblique if I remember correctly

R.I.P. King Ad-Rock #34

by Seik1177 on Apr 27, 2009 10:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

We signed Q to a 1 year contract this year...

so that being said we got him sticking around for another year.

I agree, with so much talent waiting in the wings, it does seem somewhat strange to have an overweight corner infielder on the team. I like Quinlan but he seems like a waste of space to me.

After all, if K-MO was to be a total bust (something which doesnt seem like its going to happen) then you have Matt Brown in AAA to come up or even Bobby Wilson, who can also play first.

Do it for Nick '09

by BryanHarvey'sMoustache on Apr 26, 2009 6:53 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

you'd rather have matt brown being "Q" up for the big league team....instead of getting everyday AB's?

and bobby wilson too?

Doesnt really make sense to me.

Godspeed Nick - RIP - 1986-2009

by norcaliangelsfan on Apr 26, 2009 6:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think Bobby Wilson should be given a chance...

especially after Rghan’s latest post on the Halos minor league system. At some point you gotta bring these kids up and let them prove themselves. Otherwise, its a waste of talent. I think Wood is overdue. These other guys, could use another year in the AAA, but they gotta come up eventually whether its with us or on another team via trades.

Also, Quinlan came up through our system only to land himself as the ultimate bench dude. Now hes 31 and overweight. Why not let Wilson or Brown sit there for awhile. You think with Naps, Mathis, Conger, and Budde that the catcher spot is going to be an easy transition for Wilson in a year or two?

Do it for Nick '09

by BryanHarvey'sMoustache on Apr 26, 2009 8:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Im fine with everything you said I just wanted to make sure I was understanding you correctly....

I wish there was a way to get Wood, Wilson and Brown some consistant big league playing time……its like you said…….it’s their time.

Godspeed Nick - RIP - 1986-2009

by norcaliangelsfan on Apr 26, 2009 9:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's Q for life with Scioscia, one of his stable boys.

Heir apparent to Hatcher, always by the skipper’s side — like Tolson was to J. Edgar Hoover or Jack Haley to Rodman.

Getting rid of Q is like getting rid of the cockroaches in your Hawaiian apartment … it ’aint gonna happen!

by PieceOfAase on Apr 26, 2009 9:42 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Love the Q, the underdog

Q will break out, hit .370 with 30 hr’s and 120 rbi’s, then we will trade Morales who hit .360, with 25 hr’s and 100 rbi’s (each splitting 1b – 80 games each) for Peavy and Sabathia (don’t ask me how).

When it comes to baseball, I’m just a little boy with little boy fantasies.

Go Q!

Angel Pitching (Adenhart), Angel Defense - get past that.

by vladtheimpaler on Apr 27, 2009 2:31 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Trade Q for his wife.

P.S.

I keep seeing posts that talk about how he has a really hot wife but I haven’t been able to find a picture of her? Does anyone have one? lol thanks.

by Chzburger Jones on Apr 27, 2009 3:04 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Guys, if we get rid of Q

who will be the backup 1B? We do need one of those you know…

RIP Nick. We will miss you!

by KingF15h on Apr 27, 2009 5:53 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Matt Brown, Bobby Wilson

both can play first.

Do it for Nick '09

by BryanHarvey'sMoustache on Apr 27, 2009 11:18 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Just what we need more unproven rookies on the squad.

by 44FAN on Apr 27, 2009 2:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Who you talking about 44?

unproven rookies on the team as of right now:

Ortega, Palmer…who else?

Do it for Nick '09

by BryanHarvey'sMoustache on Apr 28, 2009 9:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I get all the Q bashing

But from everything I’ve heard he’s a great role player who is paid reasonably and doesn’t ever complain about a lack of playing time. Hasn’t had any trouble outside the ball park and is well received by his team mates. He is the kind of utility player you’d want on your team.

I think ideally he gets a start once a week in either LF or 1B and occasionally pinch hits when the situation presents itself.

RIP Nick Adenhart 4/9/09

by Jay Cal on Apr 27, 2009 7:40 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

That's my story, too...

And I’m sticking to it.

Q is a great role player, who knows that’s what he’s there for. My favorite bit was when they got U-Haul, and Q commented that U-haul was a good backup for him (or something to that effect).

Angels fan since '67

by red floyd on Apr 27, 2009 9:01 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I would not start him once a week (or at all)

I agree that he is a reasonably paid role player who does not cause any problems. At the same time, however, Abreu, Matthews, Rivera, Figgins, Morales, and Wood all deserve to start well ahead of Q at the outfield and infield corner spots. Given that there are at most five spots for those six guys, and the fact that Napoli should get an occasional start at DH, I just don’t see how this team can justify giving Q any starts.

by Brody on Apr 27, 2009 10:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think you misunderstood me.

I would use Q once a week.

He wouldn’t be taken at bats away from those guys, because you don’t play those guys 162 games. 1 week he relieves K-Mo. 1 week he sits Rivera in Left. 1 week he plays right so, Matthews in Center, and Hunter gets a day off.

Etc, etc, etc.

RIP Nick Adenhart 4/9/09

by Jay Cal on Apr 27, 2009 2:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I understand

I agree that no one should or will play 162 games. And right now Q appears to be the only guy who can sub in at 1B, so he should appear in the 10 or so games that Morales sits.

But I disagree about playing him in the outfield. We already have four guys for three spots — and that’s before Vladdy returns. On most days, Torii, Abreu, Matthews, and Rivera will all play. If one of them needs to rest, I would prefer to have both Figgins and Wood in the lineup (as 3B/DH) than Q. So in your example, if Rivera were to sit, I would start Matthews in right, Torii in center, Abreu in left, and then Figgins and Wood as 3B/DH.

by Brody on Apr 27, 2009 8:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs