LA Angels Monday News Crash

Mike Trout talks hitting.

Left handed reliever Matt Strahm had knee surgery.

The Athletics are interviewing guys for their GM vacancy. We’re talking Mike Rizzo and Billy Owens here, not Perry Minasian.

Photo credit: Rex Fregosi

Subscribe
Notify of
61 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
cookmeister
Trusted Member
2 minutes ago

Angels might lose 100 games and still not have the worst record (thanks a lot Rockies)

The only saving grace:
Colorado plays 10 of their final 13 games at home, where they have a much better record than away (opponents are SD, AZ, and SEA).

Their final 3 games are on the road vs. the White Sox, who COULD be resting some guys if they clinch a playoff spot (albeit, an unlikely scenario)

Pineapple12
Legend
35 minutes ago

Rockies 55-94
Angels 56-93
Athletics 61-89
Giants 62-88

Rockies will most likely beat us out for last. Now if the Giants can finish with a worse record than the A’s that would juice our lottery odds a little more!

White Sox 76-73
Guardians 76-74
Blue Jays 75-75

Operation get Jo and Sori in the playoffs is getting closer 👀👀👀

Texan44
Trusted Member
1 hour ago

The Angels payroll in 2026 is around $160 million. My thought is IF whoever controls the purse strings wants to stay around the same number, the committed to include “estimated” arb salaries is around $84 million. So my thought is for only one/max 2 year, you COULD add 7 – $10 million players or 14 – $5 million players. Out of them, MAYBE 3 or 4 play or pitch better than this year. None will be on their way to the Hall of Fame except to buy a ticket.

(And there are certainly NOT 15 of the younger FAs worth a flip) Again, I am looking at “competitive” and not “winning it all.” And other teams will be trying to do similar, so maybe 4- 5 total would be all that would be willing to come to the Angels.

Pineapple12
Legend
2 hours ago

Let’s take quick review of our trade deadline. The numbers are reflective since being traded —

Jose Soriano: 40 innings, 4.05 ERA, 1.38 WHIP
Arjun Nimmala: .260 / .389 / .577, 8 HR

Jo Adell: .239 / .316 / .418
Jacob Cozart: .248 / .356 / .475

Ryan Zeferjahn: 13.1 innings, 6.08 ERA, 1.5 WHIP
Moises Ballesteros: .205 / .256 / .311

Chase Silseth: 15.1 innings, 5.28 ERA, 1.63 WHIP
Logan O’Hoppe: .353 / .333 / .412
Angel Arredondo: .283 / .383 / .391

Turks already covered Soriano/Nimmala. Early returns are looking like a big W for Moz.

Adell is hitting slightly above average for Cleveland and looks to be on his way to the postseason! Cozart has played a significant role himself getting Rocket City to the playoffs.

Zeferjahn has been a gascan for Chicago. Mo Baller is turning it this month .333 / .371 / .667 w/ 3 HR and looks passable behind the plate.

Silseth has regressed as his peripherals suggested he would and O’Hoppe is back in AAA. There were a few on here who lost their minds at this trade 😂.

cookmeister
Trusted Member
1 hour ago
Reply to  Pineapple12

O’Hoppe’s BA being higher than his OBP is funny

TrojanBoiler
Super Member
46 minutes ago
Reply to  cookmeister

How is that even possible?

TrojanBoiler
Super Member
45 minutes ago
Reply to  TrojanBoiler

Ahhh sacrifice flies apparently.

cookmeister
Trusted Member
28 minutes ago
Reply to  TrojanBoiler

ya it’s a weird one.

Basically Batting average is based on at bats, whereas OBP is based on plate appearances

Turk's Teeth
Editor
Legend
2 hours ago

Arjun Nimmala topped this week’s prospect hotsheet at Baseball America as the hottest prospect in the minor leagues. Kid got his face on the homepage cover and everything.

7 HRs in your last 10 games (leading all AA hitters in September) will do that.

Team: Double-A Rocket City (Southern)
Age: 20
Why He’s Here: .417/.440/1.083 (10-for-24), 7 R, 4 2B, 0 3B, 4 HR, 6 RBIs, 0 BB, 5 SO

Nice to see such strong early returns from the Soriano trade, which received some mixed reviews from CtPG among folks who weren’t so hot on Nimmala. Well, adjust your expectations, lads, he’s paying off. They’re sending him to the Arizona Fall League next month, and as we know, the AFL is something of a finishing school for advanced prospects. Dudes that perform well there tend to make their MLB debuts the following season.

Jose Soriano, btw, has been, in a word, serviceable for the Jays since the trade. 4.05 ERA / 4.33 FIP. K rate has fallen to 6.1 per 9. I think Moz should be pleased with the current outlook on his exchange.

Last edited 2 hours ago by Turk's Teeth
FungoAle
Legend
2 hours ago
Reply to  Turk's Teeth

Cool. It will be even better if we can get Eddie Micheletti and Angel Rivero cookin. Both have had a rough go of it. But if Nimmala continues to rake, that is plenty enough for me.

Turk's Teeth
Editor
Legend
2 hours ago
Reply to  FungoAle

Haha, you may getting a little greedy. 🙂 Micheletti was an unranked org guy on the very fringes of Toronto’s system – if you’re expecting impact, you’re likely to be disappointed. He didn’t even make the tail end of the Fangraphs offseason report, and got a cautionary mention in the notes (“Micheletti had the type of season that usually prompts questions in the comments. He has above-average thump and a good eye, but everything else is light.”) Maybe he finds an up and down bench role down the line?

Rivero is a teenager just coming off the complex. Giving him a cup of coffee in peak heat summer in the offensive-oriented Cal League was just a taste for him – I really wouldn’t read much into the results. Lottery ticket with a long payoff horizon.

The Soriano trade was about Nimmala, and if you can’t get excited about trading two years of decent pitcher who is ripe for regression for six years of a 30 HR+ shortstop with an above-average glove, it may be hard to excite you. 🙂

Pineapple12
Legend
2 hours ago
Reply to  Turk's Teeth

The eye test is strong for Nimmala too. Consistent loud contact and power to all fields is tantalizing

cookmeister
Trusted Member
1 hour ago
Reply to  Turk's Teeth

I’ve been very open that I wasn’t the biggest fan of this trade, mostly because I’m just not as high on Nimmala.

He definitely hits the ball hard when he makes contact. If he can improve contact rates (especially against breaking balls) then we definitely have something

Turk's Teeth
Editor
Legend
1 hour ago
Reply to  cookmeister

I remain a little surprised that your read of Nimmala is so agnostic of where he sits on the age curve.

20 year olds in AA with Nimmala’s contact quality, power output and lack of chase are very rare. There is likely always to be an element of whiff in his game, but he also is a very selective hitter for how young he is. He’s pacing first rounders from power conferences who are 2-3 years his senior at the moment.

cookmeister
Trusted Member
51 minutes ago
Reply to  Turk's Teeth

I keep having to remind myself that he’s so young

I’m coming around on him for sure, was just saying in the moment I wasn’t as big a fan

Jeff Joiner
Editor
Legend
29 minutes ago
Reply to  Turk's Teeth

I’m thinking a trip to the AFL might be warranted this season. Getting an up close look a Nimmala would be cool and I’m confident I could get a media credential.

Let’s see if I can find a road trip partner.

cookmeister
Trusted Member
28 minutes ago
Reply to  Jeff Joiner

i volunteer as tribute

Jeff Joiner
Editor
Legend
11 minutes ago
Reply to  cookmeister

Sweet.

Texan44
Trusted Member
3 hours ago

As a chronic complainer I have to post a compliment to the FO. On MLB Traders Rumors, going back to September 1st, they announced the sale by Arte. Since that date, there is a notice that Shaun Anderson signed a minor league contract. (Insert Big Yawn).

Multiple teams have DFAd multiple players getting ready for the playoffs and the FO has passed on everyone. I love they are keeping their powder dry. None of the ones that I have seen would be with the team next season anyway. Play the kids……….

BruinsAngelsKings
Super Member
3 hours ago

It’s going to be absolutely hilarious watching the collective meltdown around here if Suzuki isn’t fired.

To be clear, I’m not arguing that he should be retained. I honestly don’t know. I haven’t watched enough games, and I’m not nearly qualified enough to break down the finer points of managerial performance beyond the obvious things everyone sees.

What cracks me up is the number of people treating his firing as a foregone conclusion. You’d think the announcement had already been written and all that’s left is for someone to hit “send.”

Maybe Suzuki gets fired the day after the season ends. Maybe he doesn’t. But if the current ownership decides to punt the decision to the incoming owners and Suzuki is still in the dugout when spring training rolls around, the outrage around here is going to be spectacular. Honestly, the reaction might end up being more entertaining than the baseball itself.

steelgolf
Legend
3 hours ago

His contract runs out after the season. He won’t be fired, he just might not get a contract renewal.

BruinsAngelsKings
Super Member
1 hour ago
Reply to  steelgolf

True. Forgot about that aspect.

Texan44
Trusted Member
2 hours ago

I think that Suzuki treats his grandma nice, is friendly to his neighbors, and doesn’t beat the family dog. But I don’t understand his managerial decisions.

Just one example, the games with DC. A Nats runner took his time coming home and scored. But there was a play at second and had that runner been out, the run would not have counted. As the runner came into the dugout, their manager grabbed him by the arm and talked to him. I have no idea what was said, and it didn’t appear the manager will yelling. But it also appeared that the runner wasn’t thinking about the play at second. That is what a manager does with a young team. Not sit in the corner and just watch the game. At least, in my opinion.

Pineapple12
Legend
2 hours ago

Suzuki isn’t returning lol. There’s literally 0 chance of it happening.

FungoAle
Legend
2 hours ago
Reply to  Pineapple12

I prefer he is not rehired but the Athletic article by Rosenthal/Blum touches on an important point that the new ownership won’t finalize until late Spring and the lockout just might be enough for them to stay with status quo. Lol, also reportedly as the article alludes to…Kurt has rubbed Mozeliak pretty well as John speaks highly of Kurt. Stranger shit has happened.

What I don’t want, is another 1-year contract for anyone. Angels need to hire a guy to be put in place for years to help oversee the rebuild. That would eliminate Kurt for me.

Last edited 2 hours ago by FungoAle
milehigh
Trusted Member
2 hours ago

I think Kurt hangs around till the next GM decides on a manager.
It looks like Moz thinks Kurt is ok as a manager. Which should scare us all.

YOUknowulovetheIE
Super Member
2 hours ago
Reply to  milehigh

Suzuki won’t even call out bad play or plays from his own players, moz isn’t going to come out and trash the coach leaving in a few weeks.

milehigh
Trusted Member
1 hour ago

Moz wouldn’t have to trash publicly. Just say these are the players you will write into lineups. If you don’t like it then walk away. I’m extremely disappointed that Moz did not force Kurt who to play. Easy to see how much of an idiot Kurt is.

YOUknowulovetheIE
Super Member
2 hours ago

Lol, he’s gone.

RexFregosi
Legend
3 hours ago

Two weeks to go

Two more weeks for Zuk. He should be gone in 14 days.

Mike needs 0.4 bWAR to catch Jimmie Foxx for #29th best Position Player in history.

Go 7-6 at least.

That’s it.

Texan44
Trusted Member
3 hours ago

The caption to the photo.

Manfred: “Do you like playing for the Dodgers?”

Trout: “We are the Angels.”

HalosFanForLife
Super Member
3 hours ago

I find it fascinating how so many of the greatest hitters like MNT keep their hitting approach so simple. The Votto and Tony Gwynn analytical types seem to be the exception and not the norm. Also the huge majority of them think be on time for the fastball – react to off speed – and they try not guess too much. One exception was Kevin Mitchell who said he sat breaking ball and reacted to fastball – but most are in awe he could do that. I had Claude analyze the Talk Hitting articles and come up with some summaries. Here’s what it wrote.

What 100+ Big-League Hitters and Coaches Actually Say About Hitting: A Synthesis of FanGraphs’ “Talks Hitting” SeriesTL;DR

  • Across David Laurila’s long-running “Talks Hitting” series (the Jake Burger interview is explicitly numbered the “126th installment”), the single most universal message is “keep it simple” and hit to your own strength — but the interviews split cleanly into two camps: instinct/”feel” hitters (Trout, Harper, Nelson Cruz, Bobby Witt Jr.) and mechanics/data “nerds” (Votto, Christian Walker, Triston Casas, Josh VanMeter).
  • The sharpest single contrast in the series is Mike Trout (“I’ll pretty much approach them the same way… keeping it simple”) vs. Jake Burger (“I bucket guys more so than having an approach against individual pitchers”) — the same debate recurs as line-drive/contact hitters (Hosmer, Kwan, Steer) vs. loft/launch-angle converts (Nootbaar, Saggese, Blackmon).
  • For anyone trying to get better, the takeaway is that there is no single correct method — the best hitting coaches (Fuller, Van Scoyoc, Hyers, Edgar Martinez) all preach individualization (“meeting players where they are”), while nearly every star stresses being on time for the fastball and reacting to offspeed.

Key Findings

  1. Consensus is real but shallow. Almost everyone says the same handful of things — keep it simple, be on time for the fastball, hit to your strength, use the middle of the field — but they mean very different things by them.
  2. The deepest divide is feel vs. science, and it does NOT correlate with success. Trout (424 HR, 163 wRC+ over 7,765 PA, three-time MVP, 90.2 WAR at the time of his interview) and Harper are proudly “see ball, hit ball,” while equally accomplished Votto (a .297/.412/.513, 146 wRC+ hitter who led the NL in OBP seven times) is the series’ definitive “hitting nerd.”
  3. Prospects and mid-tier hitters talk more about mechanics than stars do — because they’re still searching for an identity (Nootbaar: “I’m still kind of searching to figure out what kind of hitter I am”), whereas established stars trust an identity they already have.
  4. Coaches uniformly reject one-size-fits-all, framing their job as individualizing and translating abstract data into something a hitter can feel.
  5. The “don’t be a robot” caveat is nearly universal, voiced even by hitters who consume heavy analytics.

Details1. Consensus principles — the advice nearly everyone gives“Keep it simple” is the closest thing to a universal creed. It is voiced explicitly by Mike Trout (“for me, it’s about keeping it simple… if I overevaluate things… bad things happen”), Jacob Berry (whose interview is literally titled “Believes in Keeping It Simple”), Marcelo Mayer (“a simple approach and a high ceiling”), Trevor Story (“likes to keep hitting simple”), Matt Vierling (“keeps hitting simple”), Bobby Witt Jr. (“I try to have it as simple as possible”), and Edgar Martinez (“the simpler it is – the simpler the mechanics – the better your chance are of hitting a fastball”). This is the most-repeated single idea in the series.
Be on time for the fastball, react to the offspeed. Trout states the archetype: “I’m always looking for one pitch. I’m looking for a fastball. If I’m on time for the heater, I can react to the offspeed.” This “fastball-timing, adjust-down-to-offspeed” logic is the default operating system for a large share of interviewees.
Hit to your strength / don’t chase your weakness. Trout: “If you’re not hitting to your strength, there’s an issue.” Eric Hosmer built an entire career-defining decision around it, concluding he needed to “stick to my natural swing” rather than chase loft that “just didn’t shape out well for me.”
Stay up the middle / use the whole field. Trout describes staying “up the middle to right-center” and “moving my sights” to fix timing. Joey Votto reworked his whole approach to “spread the ball all over the field” to beat the shift. Triston Casas wants to “use the whole field and hit the ball to the opposite field a lot.” Drew Saylor coaches hitters toward “hard line drives up the middle.”
Swing decisions are the foundation. This is the organizing principle for the more modern voices: Orioles coach Ryan Fuller (“what we believe in starts with making great swing decisions”), Blue Jays’ Hunter Mense (interview titled “On Developing Good Swing Decisions”), and Alex Bregman (“hitters with really good swing decisions” are the differentiator).
2. Philosophical campsFeel/instinct vs. data/mechanics. This is the spine of the whole series.

  • Feel camp: Mike Trout (“It’s all feel… I know when it’s right. I know my swing”); Bryce Harper (“it’s basically see the ball, hit the ball, hit it hard”), who says he “mostly throw[s] out the door” video and pitcher tendencies; Nelson Cruz, who frames hitting mainly as a mental/preparation routine; Bobby Witt Jr. (“simple as possible”).
  • Science camp: Joey Votto, the archetype, who reinvented himself twice by studying swing plane and batted-ball data and who treats Ted Williams’ The Science of Hitting as “the holy book” that traveled with him “at every major league stop”; Triston Casas (“It’s more of a science”); Christian Walker (interview titled “Nerds Out on Hitting” — “I’m a tinkerer at heart”); Josh VanMeter (“a bona fide hitting nerd”). Notably, the FanGraphs commentariat itself flagged that elite natural talent (Trout, Harper) often can’t articulate what it does — one reader wrote that “because hitting comes so obviously naturally to Trout he struggles to explicate his process,” and another predicted “Trout’s generation will be the last one to have the ‘see ball, hit ball’ guys.” Grinder-hitters (Votto, Burger) explain themselves better — a genuinely useful coaching insight.

Lower-half/ground-up vs. hands/contact-point thinkers.

  • Lower-half: Jo Adell is explicitly framed as “a Lower-Half Hitter.” Triston Casas talks about sitting “in my glute” and using “that back leg as a real anchor,” and “throw[ing] my hips” from a smaller base. Spencer Steer “revamped my lower half” and added a leg kick.
  • Hands/contact-point: Trout locates his whole game at “contact points” and setup that “gets you to that spot.” Thomas Saggese thinks in terms of body position in space dictating bat path. Eric Hosmer talks about “staying inside the ball.”

“Same approach every at-bat” vs. “bucket pitchers by arsenal.” This is the cleanest direct contrast in the series, and Laurila engineered it:

  • Trout: “I’ll pretty much approach them the same way… If I’m staying up the middle to right-center, and if I’m a tick late, I just move my sights a little bit.”
  • Jake Burger: “I bucket guys more so than having an approach against individual pitchers” — approaching sinker-slider pitchers differently than four-seam/curveball guys.
  • Alex Bregman sides with Burger’s logic in even more granular terms: “I’m not going to look for a changeup and a four-seamer in the same spot… where they start needs to be in different spots in order to be in my hot zone.”

Line-drive/contact vs. loft/launch-angle.

  • Contact/line-drive: Eric Hosmer (“trying to lift the ball… No, I don’t think that works too well for me”); Steven Kwan (“Mr. Contact,” “for me, hitting is just hitting”), who at his interview was hitting .297/.370/.382 with a 118 wRC+, an 8.8% strikeout rate (second only to Luis Arraez), and a 22.6% chase rate; Spencer Steer (“I just try to backspin line drives in the gaps… I’ve never tried to hit home runs”); Brendan Donovan (“Believes in Line Drives”); Alex Verdugo (“not trying to hit home runs”); Mark Loretta and Paul Molitor as old-school line-to-line hitters.
  • Loft/launch-angle: Lars Nootbaar (“Wants To Hit More Balls in the Air,” working with weighted bats and consciously fighting a lifelong “flat swing”); Thomas Saggese (“Believes in Loft”); Charlie Blackmon (a longtime lift proponent — “Hitting the ball on the ground is still an out, by and large”).

A useful nuance for a coach: several hitters explicitly warn that chasing launch angle can backfire. Kwan’s coaches kept “the bumpers on” his contact skills; Hosmer’s power experiment failed; Nootbaar admits creating loft “is a challenge… it takes a lot of work in the cage.”
3. Adjustment triggers — what tells a hitter something’s off, and how they fix it

  • Setup and weight distribution. Trout is the model: “I can go in the cage and put more weight on my front foot, or… my back foot… That will get me to where it feels right.” His entire self-diagnosis runs through setup because “the setup is what gets you to that spot” (the contact point).
  • “Moving your sights” for timing. Trout: “if I’m a tick late, I just move my sights a little bit. That gets me on time.” This is a low-tech, feel-based timing fix worth teaching any hitter.
  • Contact point / letting the ball travel. Bregman’s documented fix was letting the ball travel deeper and shortening his stride; Trout “catch[es] the ball deep.”
  • Widening/choking up with two strikes. Per Orioles coach Fuller, Ryan Mountcastle “played around with widening it out… choking up on the bat, especially with two strikes.”
  • Journaling and mental centering. Logan O’Hoppe keeps two journals — “The black one is for baseball. The brown leather one is for life” — to “keep myself centered” and “be where my feet are.” This is the series’ best example of a non-mechanical adjustment tool.
  • Expected-vs-actual stats to avoid over-correcting. Christian Walker uses xBA/xwOBA gaps to tell himself “you’re just not getting lucky right now,” which “helps you avoid second-guessing yourself.”

4. Handling being pitched toTrout is the archetype of a star with a known hole (elevated fastballs) who refuses to chase it rather than trying to cover it: “I know that they’re going to throw me fastballs up. If I’m in a good spot at the plate, I won’t swing at that ball up… I will lay off the ones up and hit the ones down hard.” A FanGraphs commenter’s data in the Trout piece quantified just how extreme his low-ball preference is (roughly .672 production high vs. ~1.01 low on competitive pitches — illustrative reader analysis, not editorial).
Contrast the responses:

  • Votto attacked his weakness head-on, working “all the time” with a minor-league coach to flatten his swing to high pitches: “High pitches don’t bother me.”
  • Harper dares pitchers to execute inside: “If you can pick a guy… that can throw three straight heaters on the inside part of the plate, and paint those pitches, I’ll tip my cap.” He counters location by shooting everything the other way.
  • Bregman covers his hole by refusing to swing where a pitch will end up out of his hot zone.
  • Christian Walker identified four-seamers up/in as “one glaring weakness” and responded by simply swinging less.

The practical lesson: elite hitters either (a) discipline themselves not to chase the hole (Trout, Bregman, Walker) or (b) do dedicated cage work to neutralize it (Votto). Almost none pretend the hole isn’t there.
5. Use of analytics and technologyThe series runs a full spectrum:

  • Heavy users: Christian Walker (“so many angles. It’s fun”); Casas, who dissects Trajekt machine limitations (“every pitcher… tips the pitch”); VanMeter; Rangers coordinator Donnie Ecker, a self-described “tech-and-data-savvy hitting nerd” who teaches “path forgiveness” and buckets pitch shapes into four types (four-seam vert, true sinkers, shapes in, shapes away). Jake Burger uses “WIN virtual reality” and consciously worked to “create a floor in the strike zone.”
  • Selective users: Trout (“I don’t mind analytics… when you’re going through a little bit of a struggle, you can look at that stuff”); Jo Adell (“I do [find value], but only to certain things… I’m not trying to over-diagnose every swing”).
  • Deliberate abstainers: Harper (“video-wise, pitcher tendencies — all that kind of stuff — I mostly throw out the door”).

The near-universal caveat is “don’t be a robot.” Trout: “if you’re trying to be a robot up there, trying to get a chart to be exactly the way you want it, that can get you in trouble.” Even the nerds agree: Walker credits his coaches with keeping him “competitive and less mechanical.”
6. Coach vs. player perspectiveThe coaches are strikingly consistent with one another and distinct from players: where a player describes his method, a coach describes a system for many methods.

  • Individualization is the coaches’ universal creed. Ryan Fuller’s interview is subtitled “Meets Players Where They Are,” and he contrasts Trey Mancini (needs no dial-up/down) with Ryan Mountcastle (tinkers with two-strike approach). Tim Hyers: “I think all hitters are different. I really do.” Edgar Martinez notes of great hitters, per a colleague, “everybody is an individual.”
  • Swing decisions + hard contact as an organizational funnel. Fuller: “making great swing decisions… hard contact is going to come. And if we make hard contact, OPS, scoring runs… is going to heighten.”
  • Translating data into feel. Fuller explicitly frames coaching as “taking sometimes complex, abstract things… and turning them into something tangible.” Van Scoyoc blends “modern-day concepts while still being an adherent of proven old-school practices” and stresses angles and the process/outcome relationship.
  • Curiosity as a teaching value. Drew Saylor: “One thing I talk a lot about is being curious.”
  • Retired greats lean old-school but not dogmatic. Edgar Martinez (“the simpler… the better your chance are of hitting a fastball”), Don Mattingly (“hitters with more solid mechanics, with shorter routes, can handle more pitches”), Paul Molitor (“I wasn’t ever going to be a power hitter”), Mark Loretta (“swinging isn’t hitting”), and Dave Magadan (“I like guys that control the strike zone and hit for a good average”) all favor contact and zone control over the modern max-bat-speed/loft emphasis.

The gap between coach and player framing is the report’s most coach-friendly finding: players give you their answer; coaches give you a way to find each hitter’s answer.
7. Quotable swipe file (each under ~20 words)

  • Mike Trout: “It’s all feel… I know when it’s right. I know my swing.” (mike-trout-talks-hitting)
  • Mike Trout: “If I’m on time for the heater, I can react to the offspeed.” (mike-trout-talks-hitting)
  • Mike Trout: “If you’re not hitting to your strength, there’s an issue.” (mike-trout-talks-hitting)
  • Bryce Harper: “It’s basically see the ball, hit the ball, hit it hard.” (bryce-harper-talks-hitting)
  • Bryce Harper: “Every day is a reset day. Every day is a new day.” (bryce-harper-talks-hitting)
  • Joey Votto: “High pitches don’t bother me.” (joey-votto-talks-hitting)
  • Triston Casas: “It’s more of a science.” (triston-casas-embraces-the-science-of-hitting)
  • Jake Burger: “I bucket guys more so than having an approach against individual pitchers.” (jake-burger-talks-hitting)
  • Eric Hosmer: “Trying to lift the ball? No, I don’t think that works too well for me.” (for-eric-hosmer-not-trying-to-lift-the-ball-means-better-results)
  • Steven Kwan: “For me, hitting is just hitting.” (steven-kwan-clevelands-mr-contact-talks-hitting)
  • Spencer Steer: “I’ve never tried to hit home runs. They just kind of come.” (cincinnatis-spencer-steer-believes-in-contact-and-backspinning-line-drives)
  • Thomas Saggese: body position in space “dictates my bat path.” (thomas-saggese-believes-in-loft-and-the-position-of-his-body-in-space)
  • Charlie Blackmon: “Hitting the ball on the ground is still an out, by and large.” (charlie-blackmon-revisits-launch-angle)
  • Logan O’Hoppe: “The black one is for baseball. The brown leather one is for life.” (logan-ohoppe-keeps-a-journal-on-hitting)
  • Christian Walker: “I’m a tinkerer at heart… There are so many angles. It’s fun.” (christian-walker-nerds-out-on-hitting)
  • Alex Bregman: “I’ve got to get that pitch where I want it to be if I want to drive it.” (alex-bregman-talks-fixing-his-swing-how-pitchers-approach-him-and-more)
  • Ryan Fuller: “It comes down to meeting the players where they are.” (orioles-co-hitting-coach-ryan-fuller-meets-players-where-they-are)
  • Tim Hyers: “I think all hitters are different. I really do.” (bostons-tim-hyers-talks-hitting)
  • Mark Loretta: “Swinging isn’t hitting.” (mark-loretta-talks-hitting)
  • Edgar Martinez: “The simpler it is… the better your chance are of hitting a fastball.” (edgar-martinez-on-hitting)
  • Drew Saylor: “One thing I talk a lot about is being curious.” (kansas-citys-drew-saylor-talks-hitting)

Recommendations (for any hitter or coach looking to improve)

  1. Pick a lane honestly. Figure out whether you (or the hitter you’re working with) are a feel hitter or a mechanics hitter, and train accordingly. Forcing a “see-ball-hit-ball” hitter to over-analyze — or a tinkerer to “just react” — is the single most avoidable mistake the series exposes. A simple test: if the hitter can’t articulate what they’re working on, keep it feel-based; if they keep asking “why,” feed them data.
  2. Anchor everything to the two consensus fundamentals every hitter agrees on: be on time for the fastball, and hit to your strength. Learn Trout’s low-tech timing fix — “move your sights” — before touching mechanics.
  3. Work on swing decisions before swing shape. Fuller’s funnel (good swing decisions → hard contact → runs) is the most transferable pro framework for an amateur. Track chase rate as the leading indicator; it improves earlier than results do.
  4. Be cautious with launch angle. The series is a graveyard of failed loft experiments (Hosmer) and hard-won ones (Nootbaar took years). A hitter who already drives line drives should protect that first (Kwan’s “bumpers”). Threshold: only pursue loft if you’re hitting the ball hard but consistently on the ground.
  5. Keep a journal. O’Hoppe’s two-notebook habit (baseball / life) is free, works at any level, and models how a young big-leaguer stays centered. It’s the most copyable single practice in the entire series.
  6. Use tech as a mirror, not a master. Bring in data the way Walker does — to avoid over-correcting on bad luck — and remember the series’ universal caveat: don’t be a robot.

Caveats and AppendixSourcing caveats. FanGraphs shows a membership paywall mid-article to non-members, so for many interviews the synthesis works from the substantial free lead sections plus extended search-indexed excerpts rather than full transcripts. Quotes reproduced above appear verbatim in those accessible excerpts; where a thesis is summarized without quotation marks, treat it as paraphrase. Career stats and roles cited (e.g., Trout’s 163 wRC+ and 90.2 WAR, Burger’s 107 wRC+, Kwan’s 118 wRC+) are from the interviews’ own framing as of their publication dates and are not updated to present day. The Trout interview’s high/low production-split figures come from a reader comment, not FanGraphs editorial, and should be treated as illustrative only. Votto’s “holy book” quote about Ted Williams’ The Science of Hitting comes from a 2026 ESPN feature, not the “Talks Hitting” interview itself.
Interviews read in full or substantial part: Mike Trout, Jake Burger, Joey Votto, Bryce Harper, Triston Casas, Christian Walker, Josh VanMeter, Eric Hosmer, Steven Kwan, Lars Nootbaar, Logan O’Hoppe, Ryan Fuller, Edgar Martinez, Donnie Ecker, Spencer Steer, Thomas Saggese, Alex Bregman, Jo Adell, Robert Van Scoyoc.
Interviews confirmed via targeted follow-up (thesis + one quote each): Charlie Blackmon, Doug Latta, Dave Magadan, Don Mattingly, Paul Molitor, Mark Loretta, Tim Hyers, Drew Saylor, Bobby Witt Jr., Nelson Cruz.
Interviews on the master list not individually accessed (covered only by inference from the series’ patterns; not quoted): Jeff Albert, Greg Allen, Pete Alonso, Nolan Arenado, Aaron Bates, Jacob Berry, Bo Bichette, Justice Bigbie, Cavan Biggio, JJ Bleday, Bobby Bradley, Will Brennan, Jay Bruce, Matt Chapman, Michael Chavis, Max Clark, Garrett Cooper, Gavin Cross, Jacob Cruz, Paul DeJong, Brenton Del Chiaro, Josh Donaldson, Brendan Donovan, Rick Eckstein, Drew Ferguson, Justin Foscue, Michael Fransoso, Joey Gallo, Paul Goldschmidt, Devlin Granberg, Gino Groover, Matt Hague, Andy Haines, Mitch Haniger, Robert Hassell III, Austin Hays, Nico Hoerner, Jackson Holliday, Spencer Horwitz, Rhys Hoskins, Jacob Hurtubise, Walker Jenkins, Connor Joe, Jace Jung, Josh Jung, Jimmy Kerr, Heston Kjerstad, Shea Langeliers, Trevor Larnach, Dillon Lawson, Brooks Lee, Royce Lewis, Evan Longoria, Joey Loperfido, Michael Lorenzen, Gavin Lux, Trey Mancini, Marcelo Mayer, Kevin McGonigle, Hunter Mense, Owen Miller, Colson Montgomery, Tre’ Morgan, Ryan Mountcastle, Cedric Mullins, Daniel Murphy, Vinnie Pasquantino, Graham Pauley, David Peralta, Luke Raley, Julio Rodríguez, Brent Rooker, Anthony Santander, Nolan Schanuel, Marcus Semien, Giancarlo Stanton, Trevor Story, Fernando Tatis Jr., James Tibbs III, Spencer Torkelson, Mark Trumbo, Brice Turang, Justin Turner, Trea Turner, Chris Valaika, Zac Veen, Alex Verdugo, Mark Vientos, Matt Vierling, Luke Voit, Anthony Volpe, Ryan Waldschmidt, Jared Walsh, Jordan Westburg, Jesse Winker, Mike Yastrzemski, Nick Yorke, Kevin Youkilis.
Notable contradictions / prospect-vs-veteran differences.

  • Direct contradiction: Trout (“same approach every at-bat”) vs. Burger and Bregman (“bucket by arsenal”) on the single most fundamental strategic question in the series.
  • Feel vs. science within equal résumés: Trout/Harper vs. Votto — proof that opposite methods both reach Cooperstown.
  • Prospects search, veterans trust: Nootbaar (“still searching… what kind of hitter I am”) and Steer (“still kind of fighting that battle” of contact vs. power) show the identity uncertainty typical of younger hitters, versus the settled conviction of Trout, Harper, and Hosmer.
  • Same player over time: Kwan tells Laurila “hitting is just hitting,” yet in later reporting he repeatedly overhauled his swing chasing bat speed and power — a caution that even a “contact identity” hitter can be pulled toward loft, sometimes to his detriment.
AnAngelsFan
Super Member
3 hours ago

Maybe next time write a fanpost instead of a comment when it is this long.

HalosFanForLife
Super Member
2 hours ago
Reply to  AnAngelsFan

Will do.

milehigh
Trusted Member
2 hours ago

I love Claude. I would be interested in a comparison of this Claude response with Claude summarizing Ted Williams hitting philosophies.

HalosFanForLife
Super Member
2 hours ago
Reply to  milehigh

I was actually going to have it go a lot deeper – that’s a good idea.

RexFregosi
Legend
3 hours ago

This aligns with what I remember from interviewing Mike 10 years ago.

Same approach every at bat. And f* launch angle.

gitchogritchoffmypettis
Legend

Sigh. I wish Joey Votto had been a Yankee so they’d put him in the Hall of Fame.

gitchogritchoffmypettis
Legend

Tank keep on rollin tank rollin blues. Roll on tank roll on.

We may not be able to hold off the Rockies as ultimate tank commander. They are pretty bad and wind up the season against better teams. We will have to see….

I watched Bryce Harper play this weekend, thought about Mike Trout, and got sad. They are, to a large extent, having very similar seasons. But because Harper, to his credit I think, sets and states personal goals, meets them, is a leader on a good team, etc he gets a lot of credit for a 4 WAR year. Trout is a shitty CF who Ks too much. I hope he can really make the DH adjustment. That he just comes out and says “I’ve been working on becoming a cold professional hitter all off season and I intend to be Edgar Martinez with power going forward.” I bet he could do it and have a somewhat “monster” season. Get that BA up a little, hit a few more HR and strike out a little less, get that OPS+ above 145. The difference between him and Harper at this point is basically jus perception. He’ll be the toast of the talking heads again with just a little better season.

Watching the Angels lose more close games because they can’t hit for shit has made me consider free agent options. Of course, if they do something smart like trade Neto there’d be no point, but if they don’t maybe they should try to sign a bat. People are saying Brandon Lowe but he’s gonna get the QO, or at least the Pirate fans are all talking that way. The Angels need a couple young bats like Guzman to pick it up next year AND likely a new 700+ OPS hitter along with Neto, Nolan and Trout and the young pitching to make .500. Maybe Mo Baller can help?

Sigh…. at least TJ Watt is still cool.

RexFregosi
Legend
3 hours ago

Normally I want to sign the best FAs every year. Every year.

Not this year though. No one I want. We definitely need some bats but the answer is not in the Market

gitchogritchoffmypettis
Legend
Reply to  RexFregosi

The market sucks pretty bad. I still think they should just trade Neto and Detmers, hire lots of scouts and coaching, and finish the rebuild for real. But if they went ahead and declared they are “almost almost a winner and also old men need someone to watch.” then they need to sign a middling guy investment wise who will just boost their offense a bit…. nothing splashy.

Mikeal1st
Trusted Member
2 hours ago

We’ve been calling for a complete rebuild for quite a while. Certainly the bullpen needs help and there needs to be more offense. But the SP has come along the last 4-5 weeks with new coaching(?) I’m not so much in the “sell” cam as I was especially if there’s some chance of signing Detmers and Neto to cheaper extensions. I think with so position holes to fill this team is on the upswing in the next two years. Neto and Detmers are players to start building around, and they’re pretty cheap in the meantime.

Turk's Teeth
Editor
Legend
2 hours ago
Reply to  RexFregosi

Fwiw, Neto’s value keeps a-risin’ in the BTV sim as he sees his late season resurgence. You can get all sorts of fun stuff in your Xmas stocking for him these days.

Screen-Shot-2026-09-14-at-8.46.03-AM
FungoAle
Legend
2 hours ago
Reply to  RexFregosi

Nothing stands out to me as well on a long term deal. I think the backdrop of now having a thick wallet has me thinking you could sign a 1-2 year bat as the team is building at the same time. Angels need help almost everywhere on the diamond

Pineapple12
Legend
2 hours ago

Have you not received the memo that we aren’t allowed to criticize Trout because of what he did in the 2010s?

I thought his BA would sink to the .220s so kudos to him for keeping it above .240.

jefftulsa
Trusted Member
4 hours ago

They were talking on the latest Halo Territory with Sam Blum about the possibility of Suzuki staying on next season. God help us.

RexFregosi
Legend
3 hours ago
Reply to  jefftulsa

If Zuk isn’t gone in 14 days, I hope Moz is gone in 15 days.

It’s the only important off-season decision.

gitchogritchoffmypettis
Legend
Reply to  jefftulsa

I will. Laugh. Hard.

Fansince1971
Legend
5 hours ago

The players are not buying the narratives that certain franchises/owners are at risk financially if there is not a cap. The value of the franchises – even the most penny pinching and poorly performing – are too high to accept that narrative. There is no bankruptcy risk – an owner can just sell his/her franchise for $1 billion+ to a new ownership group.

Also with current revenue sharing, the chances of a franchise not being able to pay its bills is zero.

That leaves the owners without the bankruptcy narrative that existed in the 1970s-1990s leading to salary caps in the NFL, NBA and NHL.

So what is the strongest argument in MLB for a salary cap and parity? It has to do with fans of lower level clubs losing interest in the losing franchises leading to a concentration of interest/participation in only a few clubs. There is generational risk that losing clubs will generate little sustainable interest in the future.

As an example – the Angels are still benefitting from their magical decade starting with the WS championship in 2002. Children born in Southern California in the late 1980s to early 2009s experienced that success and fanship was imprinted on them. My two girls are examples and are and will be lifelong fans. But what about children born in the last 15 years? Some will adopt their parents allegiance but vast numbers will not become fans due to the lack of Angels success/relevance. That is the long term risk to franchises who are bad for decades.

For a healthy league to exist there needs to be regenerative fan engagement throughout generations for all of the existing franchises. Without it, there is a long term risk that a team might be okay financially but have no engagement in its community. That is the risk of a league without parity. .

The problem is this is an amorphous risk and not really a financial one. Players are unlikely to buy into generational risk as a reason to accept a salary cap. As long as the money is there, owners are financially sound and the value of franchises increase, they don’t see a problem. But the risk of a handful of franchises potentially generating 85% of fan attention/engagement is a real problem for the league and that is where the battle ground exists.

Last edited 5 hours ago by Fansince1971
Texan44
Trusted Member
4 hours ago
Reply to  Fansince1971

First, I want to watch MLB Baseball next Spring.
Second, it is hard to choose sides in an argument between billionaires and millionaires as to how much money millionaires should get.

jefftulsa
Trusted Member
4 hours ago
Reply to  Texan44

It’s not a hard decision for me. The owners don’t have a cap on what they can make. The players produce the value by putting a product on the field; they generate the uncapped value that the owners take in. Why should the value-producers have their salary capped when the ones who benefit from their labor don’t?

Fansince1971
Legend
3 hours ago
Reply to  jefftulsa

Because that is how you have a healthy league. Look at the NFL, NHL and NBA not to mention other sports leagues around the World. The focus is parity so that the fans in one community within the League have as much opportunity to root for a winning franchise as any other franchise in the League. Otherwise the generational interest pools in a few successful franchises. Basically the cap and floor would help to create parity within a League that is becoming more and more disparate in terms of resources and talent.

In many ways focusing on money clouds the issue because, as Texan44 says, it’s billionaires and millionaires fighting with each other. That makes it easy to say that if the billionaires have to pay the millionaires more – who cares? As long as we can drink beer and eat peanuts. The better focus is the long term health of the League and generational interest not pooling in 6-8 franchises.

Last edited 3 hours ago by Fansince1971
jefftulsa
Trusted Member
3 hours ago
Reply to  Fansince1971

It’s just principle for me. Baseball has a super long and interesting labor history. Having a floor would be my preferred option. Cap is unnecessary and won’t happen. The owners need to stop playing poor and pony up to be competitive.

Fansince1971
Legend
2 hours ago
Reply to  jefftulsa

I think this misses the point but I respect all opinions.

jefftulsa
Trusted Member
1 hour ago
Reply to  Fansince1971

I totally get your point and I appreciate it and respect it. I totally get where you and others are coming from. It’s just for me, out of principle, I don’t support a cap. I don’t think it’s just.

Texan44
Trusted Member
2 hours ago
Reply to  Fansince1971

I think we have two distinctions without a difference. I don’t think the salary cap does anything for parity. (I could be wrong and normally am.) But a strong commissioner could pool the revenue and then the cap would lead to parity. The key phrase is “strong commissioner.”

https://www.ilovefootballseason.com/articles/football-money-the-4-65-million-gamble-%E2%80%94-how-pete-rozelle-convinced-nfl-owners-to-share-television-money-equally

Fansince1971
Legend
2 hours ago
Reply to  Texan44

The cap and floor (emphasis on the latter) would definitely create parity. The delta between the highest and lowest spending teams would shrink dramatically.

BruinsAngelsKings
Super Member
1 hour ago
Reply to  Fansince1971

On the surface, that seems like the bigger issue: the salary floor. If the league wants to address competitive balance, it should require teams to meet a minimum spending threshold rather than focusing solely on a salary cap.

milehigh
Trusted Member
1 hour ago
Reply to  Fansince1971

Sorry, I don’t see how that would happen. Teams with their own networks that don’t have to share certain revenue would always have more to spend. Even with a cap if I can buy three players to your one I probably win out in the long run.

Fansince1971
Legend
32 minutes ago
Reply to  milehigh

But if there is a floor and a cap, the difference between spending will be much reduced. For example, if the cap is $275 million and the floor is $190 million, there will not be one team spending $600 million and other teams spending $90 million. The maximum the spending gap will be is around $80 million creating parity.

As an example, with a cap, the Dodgers would be prohibited from having a payroll over that cap. At the same time, the team like.the Cleveland Indians could not have a payroll of $70m – they would be forced to spend up to the floor.

As a result, from the spending side, there would be a substantial increase in parity. There will always be better run organizations with better drafting and development of players, and that certainly comes into play. But the difference between the haves and the have-nots in terms of spending will be much reduced which should impact parity.

Last edited 30 minutes ago by Fansince1971
GrandpaBaseball
Legend
6 hours ago

With 13 games to go; Rockies ahead by one for extra pin pong balls. Finishing 7-6 means 99 loses. Otherwise, it’s a 2026 typical September morning.

61
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x