The Day After
by Nico on Nov 23, 2007 8:53 AM PST
in News
50 comments
I mean, of course, the day after the Torii Hunter signing – why, was there some sort of holiday yesterday? So as you shop on this day of bargains, frantically reading this post on your Blackberry and commenting while standing in line, here are some of my thoughts on the Angels’ signing of the man I affectionately refer to as “Tor The Second”…
• If the Angels are through making big deals, then the A’s are the winners here – simply because neither Hunter nor Matthews nor Garland is good enough, young enough, or cheap enough to constitute a major upgrade to the outfield or rotation. In adding Hunter, the Angels’ outfield has gotten a little better and in adding Garland the Angels’ rotation has gotten a little better. But not that much better, just that much more expensive.
However, the Angels may not be done making major headlines, in which case…
• Let’s hope that if the Marlins, or any other team, is willing to part with that “impact hitter” the Angels have long coveted, that they ask for enough in return. If the Angels can get someone like Miguel Cabrera and only have to give up players like Ervin Santana (7-14, 5.76 ERA), Joe Saunders (107.1 IP, 129 hits), and Reggie Willits (.344 slugging percentage) – guys who have not yet proven their long-term worth and who play at positions where the Angels are already stacked – then LAA is sitting pretty for 2008-09. In other words, one deal where the Angels don’t have to give up their best young players and the rest of the West is toast. But…
• By best young players, I mean guys like Howie Kendrick and Jered Weaver. Personally (and I’m a huge Howie Kendrick fan), I think Kendrick is a better hitter than the current versions of Matthews or Hunter or Anderson – basically any Angel this side of Vlad. If I’m the Marlins and I’m putting Miguel Cabrera out there, or I’m the Orioles and I’m putting Bedard out there, or I’m any team putting my star out there, I’m insisting on getting back the Howie Kendricks or Jered Weavers of the world, not just the Willits’ or the E. Santanas. And if the Angels, in order to add hitting, have to subtract Kendrick from their offense, or have to ask Garland to replace Weaver in the rotation, then the subtractions will start to seriously compete with the additions.
But my final thought is the humdinger…
• I have said for two years that one reason the A’s shouldn’t dismantle too quickly is that it’s only a matter of time before Vlad’s knees and/or back give out and he misses a substantial portion of a season – knees and backs are just like that and Vlad (about whom I have nothing bad to say – the guy is incredible) always has the look of someone on the verge of a physical breakdown. And every year a breakdown only becomes more likely because Vlad is a year older. The Angels just overpaid for a CFer for the second year in a row and they can’t trade either one. Publicly, they are talking about moving Vlad to DH. But when the Angels spend way too much for an OK CFer, and then do it again, you have to wonder about Vlad. Are the Angels thinking he’s headed to DH? Or DL? Just as “if Harden is healthy all season” the A’s are suddenly in contention as is, if Vlad is unhealthy the A’s are suddenly in contention as is.
All things to ponder as you hit the treadmill trying to shed those 8 pounds you put on yesterday.
Joe Kennedy (1979-2007) R.I.P.
0 recs |
50 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Vlad to the DH
The only way signing Hunter makes sense is if they bump Vlad to the DH right away. You have to figure that a person or team is going to act in their best interest and an outfield of Matthews, Hunter and Rivera, with Vlad as the DH, constitutes the Angels' best interest.
As for what it would take to land Miguel Cabrera, the latest (ralistic) rumor I've heard is Kendrick, Mathis and one of Santana, Saunders or Weaver. Kendrick is supposed to be non-negotiable on the Marlins' part, if he's not included they won't deal Cabrera to the Angels. I can only guess that Brandon Wood was never on the table otherwise he'd seem like a viable canidate to replace Kendrick in this package. (Seriously, I don't like Wood as much as most but a package of him plus Weaver would certainly go a long way toward landing Cabrera in my opinion.)
by grover on Nov 23, 2007 9:06 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I'm wondering what which team the Angels
are targeting. In other words, which team do they feel they need to build for to beat. I doubt it's the A's. The class of the league (quality team wise) has to be the Red Sox. There is always the Yankees, but the Angels handle them rather easily. The RS on the other hand have a history of man handling the Angels. Is it likely that they will put their team together with an eye towards beating the RS specifically? If so, does that change the type of players that they are going to attempt to aquire?
by alox on Nov 23, 2007 9:19 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not sure they are targeting a team.
I don't think it's a team they are targeting, but trying to make up for that embarrassing exit from the playoffs this year. If your goal is a world series and you can't even win a game in the first playoff round, then your team isn't good enough. It's a problem I wish the A's had.
A new GM trying to prove himself might factor in to the equation too.
by Threepwood XX on Nov 23, 2007 11:01 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I can't believe the Marlins would even consider
that over what the Dodgers have to offer.
It may be what the Angels are offering, but they're either going to have to hope the Marlins have their heads up a bodily orifice or sweeten the deal.
JUST Kemp and Kershaw-- forget LaRoche or any of the other prospects being bandied about here-- would be a massively superior return to Saunders/Kendrick/Mathis.
by PaulThomas on Nov 23, 2007 1:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
What the Dodgers have to offer
vs. what the Dodgers are willing
Everyone keeps throwing Kershaw into all the trade talks, what if the Dodgers refuse to part with him? Kemp doesn't really fit into what the Marlins need but he'd still be a nice piece. But let's say for the sake of arguement that the Marlins don't want Kemp, they don't think he can play CF or maybe he gives them nightmares of Jack Kemp.
So now we've pushed the line to Hu and LaRoche. So Hu/LaRoche vs. Kendrick/Weaver.
I agree that the Dodgers have more shiny to offer if they allow someone to pick and choose.
by grover on Nov 25, 2007 7:37 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
DH Vlad?
I don't understand the idea of moving Vlad to DH. I live in Illinois and don't see a lot of Angles games, so I don't know if his defense has declined. I feel like he's at least adequate in the field, and I remember that he's got a damn cannon for an arm.
I suppose he's probably a better DH option than Gary Matthews, Jr. However, I've never been big on Matthews; when he was playing for the Cubbies, I though he down right sucked. I think he's really nothing more than a fourth outfielder and late inning defensive replacement. I'd say that the Matthews signing was downright stupid. I'd much rather have Vlad in the field.
Although, as an A's fan, I prefer to see Matthews get lots of playing time and a big, dumb contract from the Angles.
by Archaeologist on Nov 24, 2007 7:31 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think it's largely about protecting
Vlad's health. His arm is still awesome in RF while his knees have compromised his mobility/range some but not immensely. The main thing is that all the roaming in the OF is very hard on Vlad's knees and I think the Angels are thinking they need to protect his body so they don't lose his bat.
by Nico on Nov 24, 2007 10:42 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think GM's too often ignore
where a player has been playing and automatically assume that when they get a player, his stats will come with him. Hunter has been playing in a hitter friendly ball park for 10 years, slick infield, relative easy HR park.
The idea that Vlad will give him more protection is silly, the Twins have some pretty good hitters over there also.
Last but not least, beware of signing an NL hitter and thinking he will hit in the AL. Everyone is jumping up and down about Cabrera, I am not so sure, his stats are good no doubt, but he plays in the NL where a lot of parks are band boxes, and the pitching is suspect at best. I think some team is going to pay a lot for Cabrera and be seriously disappointed. Let's not anoint the Angels quite yet.
The only thing that ever worries me about the Angels is their pitching, I hope they spend a lot of money on hitters, and give up pitching to get it.
by china bob on Nov 23, 2007 9:28 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Some good points, china bob -
Personally, I think Cabrera's hitting would come with him to the AL because he is the "real deal" - unless his weight becomes enough of an issue so as to affect his hitting (probably the last thing to go, but eventually it would also be impacted).
Regarding grover's post above, if the Angels had to part with Kendrick and Weaver to get Cabrera, I'd jump for joy. Because while adding a great hitter behind Vlad, the Angels would be subtracting their potentially greatest hitter besides Vlad, AND they would be weakening their rotation significantly.
If I were the Marlins, I would INSIST on including those two or I'd stand pat - Cabrera is too good to settle for less than a ransom. And if that deal went down, I'd be a happy A's fan because the Angels would have given up a LOT.
by Nico on Nov 23, 2007 9:39 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Eh
Kendrick is a guy whose extreme upside is Vlad and whose downside is Juan Pierre. Weaver's a #3 starter.
For Cabrera? He is, if he stays in shape, a first-ballot Hall of Famer.
The Angels would be a massively improved team if they got Cabrera and only had to give up those two, particularly if he came with a contract extension.
I really don't know where you're getting this "greatest hitter besides Vlad" business from. Kendrick has atrocious plate disciple; his OBP is likely to be league-average or slightly above. He also has average power. He's a fast version of Jose Vidro unless he develops one of the two. At least Kotchman knows how to take a pitch.
by PaulThomas on Nov 23, 2007 1:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You are aware
that Miguel Cabrera plays in the NL East right? Philly is a bandbox. That's it. Shea is a notorious pitcher's park. Washington, an even more extreme pitcher's park. Florida is, again, a pitcher's park. As is Atlanta. 4 of the 5 parks he plays regularly in are pitcher's parks. 2 of them are especially notorious ones.
Also, his park adjusted stats are freaking good. They are similar to Vlad's at a similar age. They are similar to Griffey's at a similar age. They are similar to Frank Robinson's at a similar age. They are slightly better than Manny's park adjusted stats at a similar age. Hank Aaron at a similar age, was slightly better.
They aren't as good as those of Frank Thomas or Albert Pujols at similar ages.
I think anyone who expects Cabrera to struggle in the AL is going to be seriously disappointed.
Also, based on park factors, Minnesota's park is actually more pitcher friendly than the Angels' park.
by rfloh on Nov 23, 2007 12:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with most of the excellent post
except the last bullet point. I don't think the Angels think Vlad is headed for the DL...I think they really want to have that DH option for their "injury risks" like Vlad and Garret Anderson. I expect to see both of them in that DH slot a lot.
I also think Kendrick is the scariest bat in the Angels lineup outside of Vlad. If the Angels get rid of him, even for Cabrera, I think I'd have to celebrate because Kendrick is only going to continue to get better and he's cheap by comparison. I would think that the Marlins would have to demand Kendrick in any deal for Cabrera.
by Tyler Bleszinski on Nov 23, 2007 10:28 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
It could be a self-fulfilling unprophecy, too,
Blez: Moving Vlad to DH could actively avoid the breakdown that always seems imminent.
I just meant that:
a. if the Angels are moving Vlad to DH it's kind of an acknowledgement that his physical condition has really gotten tenuous - how close to the breaking-point, though, we don't know
b. if Vlad goes down, the A's can compete with the Angels. Do you want to dismantle a team that is just one injury away from being in total contention? (As well as one non-injury - I say "Harden healthy" = "competitive")
by Nico on Nov 23, 2007 10:49 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
I do think that it's going to be fascinating to see which direction the A's wind up going this December.
by Tyler Bleszinski on Nov 23, 2007 12:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Kendrick is 23,
Cabrera is 24.
Kendrick should improve. What of Cabrera?
by rfloh on Nov 23, 2007 12:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
kendrick will be a monster
i would almost hedge that kendrick = cabrera (or will very soon) so that deal would be a wash.
billy? hello? billy? i know the iphone works in europe.
you're killing us here. the suspense! i can't take it anymore!!!!!
by greendatitiz on Nov 23, 2007 10:31 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
He hit .322 this year
and had an OPS under 800.
Let's put that another way. His COMBINED isolated OBP and isolated SLG (more or less corresponding to plate discipline and power) were 153 points of OPS.
Cabrera had an isoOBP of .081 and an isoSLG of .265. He actually hit for a lower average and still kicked the utter crap out of Kendrick in OPS.
For Kendrick to realistically become a top MLB hitter, he's going to need to hit at Ichiro levels. I guess it's possible, but hardly a certainty.
by PaulThomas on Nov 23, 2007 1:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Is Kendrick any good defensively?
I really haven't kept up with the defensive stats developments, so I don't feel qualified to judge. Quick glance at baeseball-reference.com (range and fielding percentage) makes him look average. But the consensus seems to be that Cabrera is an unmotivated 3B whose weight might force a switch to LF or even 1B/DH before his time. It would matter in the calculus if Kendrick were -- or were likely to be -- a really good 2B.
Virtually all of Cabrera's comps are HOFers. Only HOFer comped to Kendrick is Frank "Home Run" Baker. That doesn't prove anything about their futures, but it does say something about what they've accomplished already.
by Nick on Nov 23, 2007 6:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
My impression of Kendrick
is that he's an indifferent defensive 2B-- not atrocious, but definitely not above average. Although, again, he still has time to improve.
by PaulThomas on Nov 23, 2007 8:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That's my impression -
he's considered to be no better than average defensively right now, but he's a good natural athlete with a chance to improve. Ultimately, a lot better at his position than M. Cabrera will be at any of his, but not even potentially as good at 2B as the elites (Ellis, Grudzie, Polanco, etc.) are or as Adam Kennedy was before him.
by Nico on Nov 23, 2007 8:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, that's how he's looked to me
by Nick on Nov 24, 2007 10:09 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
i just can't look past
the fact that he hit .370 in the minors...not just one year, that's his career average. it's hard to just dismiss that.
by flipgatey3 on Nov 24, 2007 1:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
And how the ball just
jumps off his bat. He may not walk enough but I think he'll hit plenty of doubles. The guy can hit.
by Nico on Nov 24, 2007 2:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Joe Kennedy Died
I heard this on ESPN News just a second ago. Horrible news.
by jjunge on Nov 23, 2007 10:33 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
wow. 28. that is terrible..........
terrible news
by greendatitiz on Nov 23, 2007 10:42 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
he died this morning, at home in Tampa
FOXSports reports that the cause of death is still unknown, but Kennedy's agent speculates that it was either a heart attack or brain aneurysm.
Very sad story. They say he has a wife and one-year-old child.
by fortmiley on Nov 23, 2007 10:50 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Rest in peace, Joe.
n/t
by El Payo on Nov 23, 2007 12:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Overpayment.
Here's something I've seen coming up in all the Hunter threads that I want to touch upon.
I understand as A's fans we want to yell overpayment. I makes us feel good because the Angels just got better by signing one of the better center fielders in baseball to a contract the A's could never afford and it gives us hope. The sad truth is that if you offered any GM the choice between Mark Kotsay (who will sadly get yet ANOTHER chance to prove he can no longer hit next season) and Torii Hunter, they would pick Hunter any day of the week. With this move the Angels got better and the A's didn't--period!
To somehow think this move hurts the Angels is deluding yourself in the same way you might if you actually think Harden will be healthy for a year making the A's competitive. We should all be at the "I'll believe it when I see it" point with his injury antics, and if Beane builds a competitive team around Harden being healthy again then the A's deserve not to make it to the playoffs again, because that is just being a bad GM.
Torii Hunter is older, and the contract might come back to bite the Angels eventually, but 32, 33, and 34, can still be very productive years in baseball years, and the day Hunter's skills degrade to the point he wont be an upgrade over Figgins or GM Jr. in center wont come for another two or three years. Until then the Angels are better, and the sad thing is that they can afford it and still go out and pay for more pieces.
by Threepwood XX on Nov 23, 2007 11:25 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Does it really make them better?
Remember, Hunter isn't replacing GMJ, he's just making him change positions.
It certainly upgrades their defense. Gary Matthews Junior is a below average to average defensive center fielder, while Torii Hunter is average or a little bit above average and pushing GMJ to right should upgrade the defense there as well.
Offensely, though? In the lineup Hunter isn't replacing Matthews, he's replacing the DH, as Matthews shifts to right and Vlad moves to DH. The roughly .800 OPS he's likely to put up is good for a center fielder. It's not good at all for a DH, though. He's taking PAs away from guys like Casey Kotchman and Kendry Morales -- guys that shouldn't have any trouble besting Hunter's offense.
by devo on Nov 23, 2007 11:48 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
But if Kotsay is healthy, would they pay an extra
11 Million every day of the week, since Mark is making 6 0r 7 Million I believe.
by theblackpearl on Nov 23, 2007 12:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think anyone suggested
that the Angels are worse off, the only point is that they paid a lot of money ( they can afford it) and it really doesn't make any difference. The Bosox did not win because of their hitting, they won because of their pitching, the Yankees despite leading the league in almost every meaningful offensive category didn't even get out of the first round because of their pitching. The Angels won the west because of their pitching, and this signing doesn't dramatically help their only flaw, lack of a good offensive team. I think now that Torii is out of Minnesota his offensive numbers will drop, not necessarily the HR's but his batting average because he is not playing on a carpet. You don't win in baseball with hitters, you win with pitching, always have, always will. Clearly they are the best team in the West, were last year, probably next year, but not because they signed Torii. And oh yes, I would take Hunter over Kotsay, I would take almost anyone over Kotsay.
by china bob on Nov 23, 2007 12:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Plus, there are only so many moves
a team will make, and so much money they will/can spend. It's not that the Angels didn't get better - it's that in making a big move and spending big money, they didn't get as much better as they might have with another big move or spending decision.
That is, if this is the big bat behind Vlad, great - it's not that big. If this is the biggest move they make all off-season, great - they haven't improved their pitching more than maybe a smidgen and they haven't added a true impact hitter to their lineup.
There's Torii Hunter better and there's Miguel Cabrera/Erik Bedard better. So far, I still think the A's can contend and the Angels have used up a lot of payroll flexibility to get a little better.
by Nico on Nov 23, 2007 12:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
as much better as??? Those other 2 of 9 voices
aren't very good proofreaders either.
by theblackpearl on Nov 23, 2007 1:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Wait, you say that pitching
wins; you then say "The Angels won the west because of their pitching, and this signing doesn't dramatically help their only flaw, lack of a good offensive team."
Which is it? If you win with pitching, why didn't the Angels win? If you win with pitching, why is their only flaw "lack of a good offensive team"?
Also, surely improving your defense makes it easier to win with pitching?
by rfloh on Nov 23, 2007 12:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
They didn't win because Boston
has better pitching, simple as that, and if I recall the Angels had some late season injuries, and for whatever reason they also can't beat Boston in Boston or Anaheim for that matter. I think it was clear enough I was referring to the fact they won the West because of superior pitching.
by china bob on Nov 24, 2007 4:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Torii Hunter's home OPS
788.
Torii Hunter's road OPS: 797.
What idiots the Angels are. The Angels' GM is a dumbass.
by rfloh on Nov 23, 2007 12:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Since no one is saying
"What idiots the Angels are" or "The Angels' GM is a dumbass," I can only assume you are arguing with the voices in your head.
As for me, 7 out of the 9 voices in my head say I'm completely sane and I would submit that's an awfully convincing majority.
by Nico on Nov 23, 2007 12:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Too sarcastic?
I apologise for that last line.
I'm arguing against the point, that GMs "too often ignore where a player has been playing and automatically assume that when they get a player, his stats will come with him." I'm arguing against the implication that GMs are somehow that incompetent. I'm arguing against the implication that the Angels' GM is somehow that incompetent.
by rfloh on Nov 23, 2007 1:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree - there's no reason to assume
the Angels' GM is incompetent. Especially because we don't even know if another shoe will drop and if so what it will be. How can you judge a move - let alone a GM - possibly halfway through a series of deals?
by Nico on Nov 23, 2007 1:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Tor the Second
Tor II. I love it.
Makes more sense in Minnesota, though, where they have that other team with King Henry the Sixth, King Edward the Sixth, King George the Sixth, and all the rest.
by iglew on Nov 23, 2007 1:47 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I always think of him as
this kind of Torii.
by Englishmajor on Nov 23, 2007 2:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
But not the donuts kind
by iglew on Nov 23, 2007 2:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Kendrick over Cabrera
I don't see this argument. If they're giving up Kendrick for Cabrera, where does that weaken their offense (assuming the Angels will give Cabrera a new contract)? Cabrera is better than Kendrick now and, since they're roughly the same age, will continue to outproduce him for probably the rest of his career.
So they give up Weaver, that's a loss for sure but Weaver wasn't even the #2 this past year for them. Lackey and Escobar were better pitchers so their rotation will survive even without him, especially after you take Garland out of that bandbox and put him in a more pitcher friendly park.
There is absolutely NO silver lining should they acquire Cabrera. Kendrick is not the second coming of The Babe, he's a good player, but not even at Cabrera's level. We will all die should Cabrera don the red and white.
by Helloooo 1st on Nov 23, 2007 2:21 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Yikes
Wow I'm very sorry to everyone for my very last sentence. Obviously I don't want to use a phrase like that in light of recent events, just trying to use a common phrase to all of us here at AN. Ignore that line and forgive me.
by Helloooo 1st on Nov 23, 2007 2:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry if I was unclear on this -
I don't for a minute think Kendrick is or will be anywhere near the hitter Cabrera is. My point is that if they lose one of their better hitters AND one of their better pitchers (and wind up with lots of OFers but no sure things up the middle on the IF), it's not the same as if they, say, signed a better hitter than Hunter as a FA. Their lineup will be better, their rotation will be poorer, their OF defense will be stronger but their infield defense probably weaker (in that O. Cabrera was very good, AND their new 2B/SS combo will be playing together for the first time). And I'd pick them to win the West. :-(
by Nico on Nov 23, 2007 4:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The CF market
Torii Hunter was just claimed by a team that didn't really need a CF, and they're not trading their current CF as a result. When the supply of a good decreases and demand remains the same, the price of that good goes up.
I think our chances of signing someone like Cameron or Fukudome just went down another notch.
But on the bright side, our chances of unloading Kotsay on someone just went up!
by iglew on Nov 23, 2007 2:33 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Bartolo Colon
I recently saw this picture of Bartolo Colon & just about jumped out of my skin. My question is would this Ex-angel look good in an A's uniform? I know he wouldn't cut it with Chippendale's. Remember Billy's Motto: Buy Low. Right now, with a +6 ERA, Bartolo is about as low as snake crap.
by alpine26 on Nov 24, 2007 9:53 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Can't trade either one?
I think a no-trade clause is just another element of value to the player in a transaction -- a source of further compensation if/as/when a trade is desired by his club. I don't know what the going rate is, but it can be bought out, right? That's why I find it curious that/if Chavvy said he'd waive it if Billy wanted to move him. Anyone can/will waive it if the price is right.
by The Dogfather on Nov 24, 2007 11:17 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I guess the more accurate phrase
would be "can't just decide to trade either one" - it's not as if the Hunter signing was because the Angels can just turn around and trade GMJ if they want to. He has to be on board too. In contrast, in signing Garland and stocking up on starting pitchers, the Angels COULD turn around and deal Jered Weaver (for example) to land M. Cabrera, etc.
by Nico on Nov 24, 2007 11:29 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
