I wondered yesterday whether not calling up Mike Trout until April 28 cost the Angels a playoff spot and while it’s obviously impossible to say for certain the numbers certainly suggest that it could have.
Alden Gonzalez of MLB.com asked general manager Jerry Dipoto that very question last night, and he downplayed any regret about the delayed call-up and also explained the Angels’ thought process with Trout:
I don’t know how much sooner we could’ve called him up. I mean, Mike had no spring training at all. Essentially, if you look at spring training, even the game portion of spring training is a month-long exercise. We didn’t even give him that long. He had enough time to go down and get his timing, hit .420-something and then pop up and be the best player around. I have not lost sleep thinking about that, about the idea that we didn’t call him up soon enough.
Dipoto is referring to the fact that Trout missed much of spring training with the flu and a minor shoulder injury, which is a factor I included in yesterday’s post. However, it’s worth noting that Trout was healthy enough to immediately hit .403 in 20 games against Triple-A pitching once the real games started.
Ultimately when a team misses the playoffs by 2-3 games there are a dozen things you can point to as “reasons” why and for the Angels this season Trout is merely one of them, but when arguably the best all-around player in baseball spent the first 20 games of the season in the minor leagues and the team that missed the playoffs by 2-3 games got off to a 6-14 start without him … well, it’s natural to wonder about that specific reason.
Everyone talks about getting rid of Chief Wahoo but nobody does anything about it.
Well, that’s not totally true. As we’ve noted, Major League Baseball and the Indians are slowly doing something about it. But the thing they’re doing — a slow phase-out of Wahoo, hopefully in a manner no one really notices — is likely going to anger just as many as it pleases. Such is the nature of a compromise. Such is the nature of trying to do the right thing but being afraid to state the reason why they’re doing it.
A bold move would be a lot more interesting. Not just getting rid of the logo, but totally rebranding the Indians in a cool and exciting way that would inspire people to buy in to the new team identity as opposed to merely lament or accept the abandonment of the old one. To that end, a man named Nick Kendall came up with a super fun and super great-looking redesign and rebranding of the Indians over the weekend.
Kendall, who is not really a big baseball fan but who has spent a lot of time thinking about uniforms and design, went back to 1871 and Cleveland’s first professional baseball team, the Forest Citys (yes, that’s how it was spelled). He took their logo — an interlocked F and C — and built an entire set of uniforms out of it and some aesthetic choices of his own. The new color scheme is a dark green and white. He even includes two alternate, solid-jersey designs. All of it is done in a great looking mockup. Really, go check it out and tell me that’s not cool.
I like it for a couple of reasons. Mostly because the uniforms just look fantastic. I love the design and would love to see a team with that kind of look in the game. We have too many reds and blues. Green is woefully underused in Major League Baseball and it’d be good to see some more green around.
Also, as Kendall notes, and as soccer shows us, the “[city] [mascot]” name construction isn’t the only way to approach team names, and so the name — Forest Citys, or some derivation of it — would be unique in baseball. Maybe it’s be “The Cleveland Forest Citys/Cities.” Maybe “Forest City B.C.” would be a way to go? Maybe, as so often happened with baseball teams in the past — the Indians included — the nickname could develop over time. It’s certainly preferable to the option a lot of people point to — The Cleveland Spiders — which (a) evokes the worst baseball team in history’ and (b) sounds like something a 1990s NBA marketing team would come up with.
If the Indians are going to get rid of Chief Wahoo — and they are — why not do something fun and new and exciting?