What $71 million buys you these days

[Angelsjunky]

So in retrospect the Angels paid (or will pay) Vernon Wells a total of $71 million. The original four years remaining was abou $89 million, minus $5 million that Toronto paid = $84 million. The Yankees pay $13 million of his remaining contract which brings us to $71 million.

 

This is what the Angels got for $71 million:

 

208 games, .222/.258/.409, 36 HR, 95 RBI, -0.3 rWAR

 

Could that be the worst large sum ever spent in big league history?

[Glen]

Barry Zito, Kevin Brown, A-Rod...

[Spirit]

Gary Gaetti

[RallyMo]

Could that be the worst large sum ever spent in big league history?

 

Nope. That distinction belongs to the 2012 Red Sox.

[tdawg87]

One night of doing coke with Ron Washington.

[Wallerrrr]

Jason Schmidt

[RallyMo]

Jason Schmidt

 

Holy crap. He wins this running away, and I wasn't sure anybody could defeat Wells.

 

Check this out:

 

 

2007-2009 LAD 3 6   6.02 10 GS 10 G 1.708 WHIP   -0.6 WAR    43.1 IP

 

for..... $47 million.

[gotbeer]

Andruw Jones for the Doggies.

 

Think they paid him around $36 million for 2 years.  Only played one for the Doggies.  .158/.256/.249/.505  -1.7

[gotbeer]

Could that be the worst large sum ever spent in big league history?

 

 

Crawford could still give it a run for it's money.  But too early to call that one.

[ELEVEN]

Albert Pujols in 3.. 2.. 1 years?

[Greenbaumer]

Jason Schmidt

Winner.

[nando714]

Jason Bay Mets?

[Blarg]

He was one of the nicest guys the Angels never got any production out of.

[Ballpark Nachos]

Where does Torii Hunter's inflatable furniture investment fall in this discussion?

[AZMike]

It's actually a bit less than $71M if you subtract the salary owed to Juan Rivera. Although Napoli had excess trade value compared to his salaray so that argument may come out in the wash... anyway:

 

Crawford could still give it a run for it's money.  But too early to call that one.

 

 

Ironically if that happens Arte would have been right about Wells at least being less $ at risk than Crawford (their plan A that offseason) 

 

Albert Pujols in 3.. 2.. 1 years?

 

yeah, if his downward trajectory and latest injury situation worsens this could turn into a bigger boondoggle than ARod's second 10 year contract. Even despite his addiction issues the Hamilton contract at half the overall length, same AAV seems a lot less scary.

[laagamer]

Heck, A-Rod gave some production. At least he turned in a solid season or two, not that it was ever worth the money they paid him.

[Hubs]

So in retrospect the Angels paid (or will pay) Vernon Wells a total of $71 million. The original four years remaining was abou $89 million, minus $5 million that Toronto paid = $84 million. The Yankees pay $13 million of his remaining contract which brings us to $71 million.

 

This is what the Angels got for $71 million:

 

208 games, .222/.258/.409, 36 HR, 95 RBI, -0.3 rWAR

 

Could that be the worst large sum ever spent in big league history?

It's certainly up there.

 

The Angels only took on $81 Million for what it's worth, they owed $86 M not $89 M for four seasons. But still for $68 M, this is pretty bad.

 

The Dodgers spending $55 M on Darren Dreifort and $105 M on Kevin Brown jump out, but I can't think of a non-pitcher that was a worse investment.

 

Wells just wasn't a good fit…but to Reagins defense, they had just finished a really poor 2010 season where Bourjos didn't hit, Abreu looked bad, Rivera looked bad, Napoli played mostly 1st because he couldn't play C, Morales was lost for the year, Hunter looked like he regressed. They didn't know Trumbo could make the adjustment to the majors, they didn't know Bourjos would hit so well in 2011.

 

They had lost out on Carl Crawford in FA…it wasn't looking good offensively. A year after nearing the franchise record for runs scored at 883, they had scored a measley 681 runs, over 200 runs less. They needed offense. There wasn't much out there or at their own AAA level. They took a gamble and lost. 

[Ballpark Nachos]

. . .

 

Wells just wasn't a good fit…but to Reagins defense, they had just finished a really poor 2010 season where Bourjos didn't hit, Abreu looked bad, Rivera looked bad, Napoli played mostly 1st because he couldn't play C, Morales was lost for the year, Hunter looked like he regressed. They didn't know Trumbo could make the adjustment to the majors, they didn't know Bourjos would hit so well in 2011.

 

They had lost out on Carl Crawford in FA…it wasn't looking good offensively. A year after nearing the franchise record for runs scored at 883, they had scored a measley 681 runs, over 200 runs less. They needed offense. There wasn't much out there or at their own AAA level. They took a gamble and lost. 

 

That's the best defense of Reagins/ Wells I've ever read.  I'm not saying that I agree, but I applaud the argument.

[stormngt]

agreed!

That's the best defense of Reagins/ Wells I've ever read.  I'm not saying that I agree, but I applaud the argument.

[Angel Oracle]

^{I still wonder WTF happened to a guy who despite the uneven peripherals still put up decent/solid enough numbers for Toronto.}

^{I guess it's possible to lose it overnight.}

[gotbeer]

^{I still wonder WTF happened to a guy who despite the uneven peripherals still put up decent/solid enough numbers for Toronto.}

^{I guess it's possible to lose it overnight.}

 

 

He was unaligned on the West Coast.  Now that he's going back east, the alignment will probably be back.

[Brent Maguire]

That's the best defense of Reagins/ Wells I've ever read.  I'm not saying that I agree, but I applaud the argument.

Totally agreed. Great argument actually!

[Adam]

I'm really starting to think the Wells deal was a bad one

[RallyMo]

What hurt most about and yet was best about it was that we traded Napoli and he went on to kill it for the Rangers for a single year.

 

With that said, without the resulting acquisition of Napoli, the Rangers would never have been in a position to pull off the single greatest choke job in baseball history. Given the facts that A) even if we didn't make the trade we wouldn't have won it all that year and that B)Napoli fell apart as Mike Scioscia ultimately knew he would due to his feeble nature, it's actually good that the Rangers gained Napoli for 2011 and we didn't have him. Outside of Santana's no-no, the fact that the Rangers blew it so spectacularly was the BY FAR the best thing about the 2011 season.

 

Furthermore, after 2011, you know Rangers fans were sure they had the catcher position locked up for another half a decade, and by a guy that would mash for that period of time. We knew better than those birdbrains. The Angels took much better care of Napoli and his fine china hips while not intentionally injuring him for the sake of winning like the Rangers did.

 

What I'm saying is...the Wells deal was a good one.

[Mark68]

Darren Dreifort approves of this thread.

 

So does former Rockie Mike Hampton.