THIS IS MY TAKE...

... not that everything else on this blog isn't my take, always. But I'm going to formally throw my opinion out there on this one. Don't criticize, appreciate. Ha!

I believe Lackey has already been a 20 game winner, despite what the numbers actually claim. It's already been stated in articles across MLB's finest that there have been 4 blown saves by the bullpen in his starts, which would have resulted in wins for him. Therefore, already made it to 20. It doesn't even matter anymore anyway, it's not about the player but about the team. And if anyone knows that, it's Lackey, who is expressly self-dignified about the whole concept of team. But I'll tell you this, I see Escobar's win column exceeding Lackey's by the end of this season. But this is just my take on the issue.

Also, I think I get the issue with both Shields and K-Rod at this point. It took a simulated start, a ball-thrown-into-the-right-field-seats frustration setback to cool and collect Shields, a couple of games off, and the right amount of attention to detail and a bit of work, for him to bounce back from a seemingly uncharacteristic slump. Not unheard of. I always say, you can't always be perfect. But his history shows that he's worth the fixing, and not just something to give up on. And look how it resulted. He came back tonight full-force, retiring the four he faced, striking out three of them, and most importantly, getting K-Rod out of a bases loaded, 2-out jam. It was like, a make-up for all those times that Shields set up for K-Rod, and when K-Rod was the one getting Shields out of the jam. And it's obvious that THAT happened several times this season. So let's just call it, payback? No, not payback, too negative. Ah! Returning the favor. Yes, yes. That's it.

Back to the issue. I think the issue is this: this season has shown a wide range of Angels' scoring. They've won by a lot, they've lost by a lot, but there have only been specific instances (playing Oakland, for example, as is always the case) where the games have been decidedly close. Because the scores have been further than 3-4 runs apart, Shields and K-Rod have been getting a real unbalanced usage all season. I noticed this trend about mid-June. It was seeming to me that 4 or 5 games (maybe even more in some stretches) would go by and we'd see everyone in the bullpen BUT Shields or K-Rod. And I would imagine, even with warming up consistently in the bullpen, that the inconsistency of REAL playing time would cause unrest in the pitchers. And because of this, there was a real showing of inconsistency in the players' stats and performances. I would really account this to the Angels' bullpen this season. The bullpen has certainly taken many different shapes this season, with the designated for reassignment of Carrasco, to the signing of Speier, the emergeance of both Bootcheck and Moseley, and the radical change in Oliver. Not to mention, the now new relievers of Bulger and Thompson. So many people needing work, so few innings. Especially with Lackey and Escobar, the aces, tearing it up this year, going 7,8, innings, complete games. It takes away from the bullpen.

But if you really get down to it, this has really been an off-year for the Angels' pitching, period. Which is an unusual idea to grasp, considering not only that the Angels are on their way to pretty much smoking everyone out of Major League Baseball, but also the fact that the Angels' organization basically prides itself on its pitching philosophies, from the ground (i.e. the minor leagues) up. It wasn't only the bullpen this season that changed drastically, but the starting rotation took a WIDE range of possibilities. The only consistencies really thus far have been Lackey and Escobar, who remain the one-two punch. Weaver started off in rehab assignments, as well as Colon. Santana saw the destruction of his psyche as his psychological issues with day games and road losses took their toll on his ego and knocked him back a few steps in the process. Moseley bounced back and forth from pen to starting, while Saunders bounced back and forth from Salt Lake to Anahiem. And this is just my take on this, but Saunders probably never should've been bounced around to begin with. But that's just MY take on the issue...

A lot is being said in regards to the poor Oakland Athletics and their suffering roster due to injuries. Some 20+ players have been switched around, three of their biggest names (Kotsay, Buck, and Chavez) on the DL for crucial stints in the season (possibly till the end), and various trades around the league have pretty much rendered them moot for the rest of the season, starting pretty much in the BEGINNING of the season. But the more I think about it, the more I realize that the Angels have really had a lot of the same problems. Figgins didn't see the start of the season until his hand healed from broken fingers, and returned to the DL with a bruised bone which he's still not over, yet. Not to mention, Kendrick has visited the DL twice with similar broken bones, as well as two stints from Kotchman for various injuries, two for GA for muscle issues, Aybar is still there, Juan Rivera didn't see an Angels uniform all season until about a week ago, and Napoli hasn't played since, what, late July? The Angels have definitely had their share of helpings of the ever-so-bitter tasting Disabled List.

But what's the difference? Not amount, that's for sure, nor quality of players that move from the starting lineup to the DL. Every one of those players on the DL for the Angels was either a starter or extremely crucial for one reason or another. The difference, instead, is that the Angels offer an amazing amount of depth. You can play pretty much a totally different lineup one day to the next, with nine completely different players. The result? Consecutive wins. The philosophy is the difference. These guys play to win, and they play with an intense passion and a knowledge of the game unseen in other clubs. That, is the difference.

So the fact that GA got his 12th game in a row RBI, not really all that surprising. In fact, I won't really be surprised if he ties the AL record in his next start. In fact, I won't be surprised if he sets a new record. For some reason, when certain players on this team are hot, they stay that way for a while.

Look at Figgins, for instance. His first game back after I think it was two weeks of not playing a single game (not counting his pinch run, sorry. Doesn't count), they guy hadn't missed a single beat. He collected all three runs on the night, because he gets on base. He STILL has a ridiculously high batting average since his first return in May, and has the highest on-base percentage of anyone since the All-Star break.

You know exactly what this reminds me of? Last year's post All-Star break. I remember what it was like. They went 22-8 in the first 30 games post All-Star break, and had several hot streaks then too. The only difference last year was their pre All-Star break bout, with a losing record and several games behind a much more efficient Oakland team. This year, the Angels win with consistency, and most certainly with a depth that no other team can even come close to boasting.

I'll be very interested in seeing the last few games of this season. I'm really looking for a four game sweep in this Cleveland series. Why? Because I'm pretty sure the Angels can do it.

Just think - if it's the Angels in the post-season, and the Mets... The Angels have the best home-record in baseball, right now at 48-23, I believe. And if the Angels make it to the World Series (which I'm seriously advocating at this point in the game), the Angels WILL have home advantage due to the yet again win of the AL in the All-Star. Duh. As if THAT wasn't something we all saw coming... Anyway, and the Mets boast the most winning record for on the road. So a team playing at home with the best home record, and a team playing on the road with the best road record...

Sounds like a recipe for some intense few last games of the season.

I really think it'll probably be the outcome. The only obstacle at this moment for the Angels is the Red Sox, and I'm hoping momentum will be the deciding factor for that at this point. But we'll see in due time.

But if there's any team in baseball that the Angels are even remotely like, it's the Mets. Similar style of baseball, similar team philosophy. So if they make it, what will that tell you? That it's a good and viable philosophy? Yes. I believe so.

So that's my take today. Wow, that was a lot to say. Too bad I can probably pry out a billion other things to go along with it all, but I'll save it for another day! Until then, Good game, and good night! Ha!