The Angels gave Mike Trout $1MM. That is a record 1-year contract for a 2-year player.

He isn't arbitration-eligible so the Angels didn't have to do that, most teams give their best 2-year players only a very small increase over the minimum. More than likely the Angels are trying to build up some goodwill to convince him to sign a really long-term deal.

Like that would change anything, that's peanuts

Dude is going to break the bank.

Last night Jack Harry said Duffy is the clear choice for #5 and management seems to agree. While I don't dispute that it seems really odd to me that Ventura wouldn't be a better option. I would be shocked if he's not in the rotation for good at some point this year, so why pull the "Wade Davis experiment" again and put guys in the rotation when better alternatives already exist?

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>I&#39;m not sure if that&#39;s precisely how it works. RT <a href="https://twitter.com/PapaJerwickNow">@PapaJerwickNow</a>: did Escobar have the baby yet?</p>&mdash; Andy McCullough (@McCulloughStar) <a href="https://twitter.com/McCulloughStar/statuses/439096113832812544">February 27, 2014</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Neither Ventura or Duffy have proven much yet in the majors. How can you say that one would for sure be better than the other?
And this "Wade Davis experiment", who were these already existing better alternatives last year? Hoch?

Bruce Chen?

Jack Harry is about a good a source for Royals news and predictions as Tiger Board is to get a pulse of the general Missouri fan base.

I would bet Ventura stands a better chance of opening the year in the rotation than Duffy. Ventura isn't going to face the innings limits that Duffy will. He can likely give them 200 IP with no problem. Duffy is probably limited to 150. Even if Danny came out of the gate in style and dominated, he's likely getting shut down in August or September, when they will really need him.

We've discussed it before, but if 10 starts early from Chen ensures Duffy is available down the stretch, I'm OK with that. Would much rather have Duffy's upside available for potential playoff situations. Either way, it's hard to see Duffy making more than 24-25 starts. Which means you have to fill in from somewhere.

This is pretty much exactly how I see it as well. As long as they don't keep Ventura down for a service time related reason, I think he's likely to be the number 5 out of the gate. And I say that fully hoping that both will spend the majority of the year in the starting 5, save for Chen and his 8-10 starts throughout the season. I'm just not certain (haven't heard) whether he'll be used like last year out of the pen early and starting in the summer or vice versa.

On another note...can't wait to flip on the radio in 30 minutes and hear the crack of the bat!!

"Wade Davis Experiment" sounds like a great name for a shitty band.

Like the name of a half baked Alan Parsons coverband

Would they ever consider doing a 6-man rotation for a while to slow down Duffy’s innings? Or is that not important enough to risk getting the other starters out of whack?

That is FAR, FAR too progressive and forward thinking for this front office or managerial team to tinker with it.

Besides, it would also limit the starts you have Shields making. It honestly would probably be better to use a spot starter to skip them once a month or something like that.

Spring Training baseball!

I'm so excited for the season I think I'll listen to this on the radio for a while.:)

Nice to hear Lebfavre on the radio on the drive home