Jump to content
  • Welcome to AngelsWin.com

    AngelsWin.com - THE Internet Home for Angels fans! Unraveling Angels Baseball ... One Thread at a Time.

    Register today to join the most interactive online Angels community on the net!

    Once you're a member you'll see less advertisements. Become a Premium member and you won't see any ads! 

     

Bring back Haren for a year?


floplag

Recommended Posts

Im sure this has perhaps come up but i havent seen it so forgive the duplicate if there is one
MIA still needs another OF for backups... if Haren wont go would it be worth bringing him back for the year?
I dont give up a big piece or anything as they are looking for a 4th OF type.
Thoughts?  He's not a front line guy at this point but solid at the back

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What notti said. This isn't the desperate straits that the Angels have been in for the last couple years - they've got tons of depth in the rotation and bullpen. At this point the only way to really improve the rotation would be to get Scherzer or Shields and that isn't going to happen.

 

To be honest, it is probably going to be a very slooooow next couple months with numerous trade suggestions from fans but little to no actual movement from Dipoto and company.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's taking a while for either Sherzer or Shields to get an offer. Could it be owners are all thinking this is a huge waste of money and stonewalling?

 

I keep thinking that, at some point, a big name free agent will come along and everyone will balk at the asking price and he'll end up receiving a much lower contract than expected, which would in turn instigate a downward turn in free agent contracts, or at least a levelling out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I keep thinking that, at some point, a big name free agent will come along and everyone will balk at the asking price and he'll end up receiving a much lower contract than expected, which would in turn instigate a downward turn in free agent contracts, or at least a levelling out.

or an investigation.  

 

Using Scherzer as an example, I think there would be a bunch of teams in if he were to 'only' get John Lester money.  But I doubt there will ever not be a team willing to add that extra year to get the deal done.  

 

I think we will see a leveling out of sorts.  A bunch of big tv contracts hit recently that will have 10+ year lifespans so once payrolls ramp accordingly, we will likely see only slight inflation during that time.  But there will always be teams willing to spend that cycle in and out.  

 

Now it's the cubs.  5 years from now it might be the phils.  

 

It will also take some time for the new international rules to have their effect.  That's gonna be huge actually.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like Dan Haren, but I'm just wondering where his fit would be.

 

Richards, Weaver, Shoemaker, Wilson, Santiago, Heaney, Tropeano and Rasmus. 

 

You can't slot him above anyone but Heaney, Tropeano and Rasmus, and all three of those youngsters proved they're ready for the majors this year.  Putting Haren over them wouldn't do them or the team any favors.

 

Even if you pretend Richards will miss his first three starts, Wilson is toast and Santiago is in the pen, Haren still wouldn't be in the Angels rotation.  There's no such thing as too much depth, but it has to be the right kind of depth.  Young and inexpensive.  

 

Bringing back Haren at this stage in his career to be 9th in line for the Angels would neither be the right fit for him or the ball club. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think the reason would be do we think all the kids are ML ready?
If not, and the brass feels they need a little more time to get ready and not rush them, it wouldnt be a terrible thing.
not anything thats going to be a huge difference maker, just a 1 yr thing to buy time was my thoughts... meh, maybe giving the kids a shot is a better choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very few pitchers, or players actually, begin their major league careers at their peak level. They generally need time to grow, to develop - and at the major league level. Signing a Dan Haren to start over Heaney and Tropeano not only doesn't really improve the team, but it potentially slows the development of those pitchers who, at this point, have more upside than Haren going forward. Heaney is a future #2-3, Tropeano probably #3-4 - both, I think, can at least be solid #4 starters next year. Haren has pretty much been the definition of a #4 starter for three years now, so I don't expect anything better than that.

 

So the question is, who do you want starting for you:

 

1) A 34-year old guy making $10M a year or so, performing at a #4 level with no upside?

2) Two 24-year olds making $500K, performing at least at a #4 level with substantial upside?

 

It is a no-brainer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reasoning for me to bring back Haren is leverage.

 

Dodgers are on the hook for Haren's salary. Haren has essentially told Marlins trade me to the Angels or I will retire.

 

Marlins should dump him to us for almost nothing and his salary is paid for. 

 

I would be all over trading a low end prospect to Miami and sticking Haren in the Jerome Williams role. Long man when CJ gets blasted, a few starts here and there, some competition for CJ, insurance in case we get injuries. 

 

If the cost for Haren is league minimum and a low end prospect I say go for it. He had some really good stretches last year. 

 

Am I the only one that remembers us considering starting Randy Wolfe last year but instead went with the all bullpen approach? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the only way you bring in Haren is if the Angels can trade Wilson, but the only way you trade Wilson is if A) Some team is willing to take on most of his contract and/or B) you get a nice prospect in return. Wilson probably won't be worse than Haren would be, but still could be better if he figures out what was wrong in the second half. He was still a good pitcher for the first couple months and then just imploded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very few pitchers, or players actually, begin their major league careers at their peak level. They generally need time to grow, to develop - and at the major league level. Signing a Dan Haren to start over Heaney and Tropeano not only doesn't really improve the team, but it potentially slows the development of those pitchers who, at this point, have more upside than Haren going forward. Heaney is a future #2-3, Tropeano probably #3-4 - both, I think, can at least be solid #4 starters next year. Haren has pretty much been the definition of a #4 starter for three years now, so I don't expect anything better than that.

 

So the question is, who do you want starting for you:

 

1) A 34-year old guy making $10M a year or so, performing at a #4 level with no upside?

2) Two 24-year olds making $500K, performing at least at a #4 level with substantial upside?

 

It is a no-brainer.

 

true though again it assumes those guys are ready for this level.  if they are then i would agree, but thats the big question, are they

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reasoning for me to bring back Haren is leverage.

Dodgers are on the hook for Haren's salary. Haren has essentially told Marlins trade me to the Angels or I will retire.

Marlins should dump him to us for almost nothing and his salary is paid for.

I would be all over trading a low end prospect to Miami and sticking Haren in the Jerome Williams role. Long man when CJ gets blasted, a few starts here and there, some competition for CJ, insurance in case we get injuries.

If the cost for Haren is league minimum and a low end prospect I say go for it. He had some really good stretches last year.

Am I the only one that remembers us considering starting Randy Wolfe last year but instead went with the all bullpen approach?

I agree with this. It isn't hard to envision in which Richards isn't ready to start the season, Wilson is ineffective, and someone else is injured. In that case, we'd be looking to a guy like Roth to start. No thanks.

If you can get Haren for practically nothing, you can release him if he is ineffective or you don't need him.

The only real issue, IMO, is a roster spot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's pretend Richards isn't back in April, Wilson dice bombs completely and Santiago is moved to the pen in a set up and lefty role.

The Angels rotation would still be Weaver, Shoemaker, Heaney, Tropeano and Rasmus, who are all better than Dan Haren at this point.

Basically, the worst possible outcome of every situation would need to arise in order for Haren to even be the 6th man in the rotation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's pretend Richards isn't back in April, Wilson dice bombs completely and Santiago is moved to the pen in a set up and lefty role.

The Angels rotation would still be Weaver, Shoemaker, Heaney, Tropeano and Rasmus, who are all better than Dan Haren at this point.

Basically, the worst possible outcome of every situation would need to arise in order for Haren to even be the 6th man in the rotation.

 

You are still counting on 3 guys in that rotation who have not ever had MLB success as a starter. For the long run I love that rotation. Like I said, if Haren's cost is THAT minimal I think he is a wise insurance spot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...