Additional SP depth/flyers

[Angelsjunky]

CJ Wilson had a bad year but still netted the team 13 wins. FYI I realize wins aren't important. I still believe Wilson is a lock as a starter. I can see Wilson having a bounce back season.

The only reason you trade Wilson is for a top rotation pitcher ... my preference!

You don't gamble your season away because you want to see what the kids could do.

 

I think Stradling said it really well, but I wanted to add some nit-picks. First of all, Wilson did NOT "net the team 13 wins" - rather, the team netted CJ 13 wins! Another way to look at is that CJ netted the team 15 good chances to win--that is, he pitched 15 quality starts. Clearly QS isn't a be-all, end-all stat, but it holds value in that it is a rough estimate of whether or not a starter gives his team a better than even chance of winning. CJ had 15 QS in 31 starts, or a 48 QS% - which is well below previous years. In 2013 he had 24 QS, or 73%; from 2010-12 it was all in the 20-23 range, or 61-68%.

 

Take a look at a few random pitchers in 2014 by QS%:

 

* Kershaw 89% - who led the majors.

* Garret Richards 73%

* Jered Weaver 65% (compared to his career best of 85% in 2011)

* Joe Blanton in 2013 45% (yes, CJ wasn't much better than Blanton)

 

Furthermore, consider the following (with number of such pitchers per team):

* Six pitchers had 80 QS% or higher  (0.2/team)

* 30 pitchers had 70 QS% or higher (1/team)

* 70 pitchers had 60 QS% or higher (2.33/team)

* 99 pitchers had 50 QS% or higher (3.3/team)

*115 pitchers had 40 QS% or higher (3.8/team)

 

Those numbers are based upon qualifiers, so only among 130 starters. Interestingly enough, Hector Santiago had the fewest QS of any qualifier at 21%...but I think this is largely due to the fact that he was kept on a short leash, and also just tended to have high pitch counts.

 

 

The major league average in 2014 was 54%, which is historically rather high - the norm is usually more like 50%. Anyhow, if we consider that there are 30 major league teams and if we think that the terms "#1-#5 pitcher" refer to an average to good team (80+ wins),  I think we could use the following definitions for what a "#1" or "# anything" pitcher is.

 

#1: 75+ QS%

#2: 65-74 QS%

#3: 55-64 QS%

#4: 45-54 QS%+

#5: 44 or below QS%+

 

Or something like that. In this formulation, CJ was a #4 starter in 2014, but tends to be a #2-3 starter. In fact, I'd say he was the definition of a "#2.5" in his prime.

 

Finally, it is also worth noting that the greatest starters in recent years - Clemens, Maddux, Johnson, and Martinez - all had career QS% around 65-67%. That includes their early and late years, so brings their average down. But for me that two-thirds mark is a good indicator for a pitcher being very good.

[Docwaukee]

DeLoach has great numbers and is mostly a smoke and mirrors type. I think he'll be a very good lefty specialist though.

 

how do you smoke and mirrors your way to peripherals like that?  He must have an out pitch if he's missing that many bats.  

[Second Base]

how do you smoke and mirrors your way to peripherals like that?  He must have an out pitch if he's missing that many bats.  

 

His scouting report over at MWAH will be published in a couple of days.  But in a gist, he gets by because he's smart. Moves in-out, up-down, works backwards, strange arm angle, hides the ball well, very good command despite K/9 (he's a nibbler), good slider and change up. 

 

I don't see it working across more than 3 innings in AAA because of the environment (will minimize the breaks in both his slider and change) or in the majors because of the talent and refinement.,  But I think he'll be absolutely death on lefties. 

[ten ocho recon scout]

Were probably fine depth wise, so unless its a top of the rotation guy, we dont need to sign any of those listed. That said, if the price is right, i wouldnt mind a reclaimation project for cheap.

Im excited to see what tropeano can do. I think thats a great under the radar move. But, lets say you have ogando and he is decent (for arguments sake). A tropeano could then be moved during the year for something we need. I know it goes against what weve been doing, but i have a feeling were gonna want another bat at some point this year. Nothing to back it up, just a bad feeling.we obviously cant lose trout, but if something happens to albert is what im getting at....and sadly, we cant count on hamilton to pick up the slack.

[Angel Oracle]

His scouting report over at MWAH will be published in a couple of days.  But in a gist, he gets by because he's smart. Moves in-out, up-down, works backwards, strange arm angle, hides the ball well, very good command despite K/9 (he's a nibbler), good slider and change up. 

 

I don't see it working across more than 3 innings in AAA because of the environment (will minimize the breaks in both his slider and change) or in the majors because of the talent and refinement.,  But I think he'll be absolutely death on lefties. 

Jamie Moyer II?

[Angelsjunky]

Jamie Moyer II?

 

Jered Weaver II.

 

(dodges tomatoes)

[Second Base]

I'm thinking something more along the lines of Scott Downs with his lower arm slot, 90-ish fastball and effective chance/slider. 

[Stradling]

I appreciate your opinion. Wilson just turned 34 years old ... would you mind explaining why you think he's done? Why can't he have a bounce back season?

Any others have a explanation?

Did you even read my post you quoted?

[Troll Daddy]

Did you even read my post you quoted?

Who me? Lol

I'm so used to reading negativity around here .,, my apologies. Nice post btw

Edited December 30, 2014 by Troll Daddy

[arch stanton]

As Notti mentioned we have to keep in mind who will command a ML roster spot and who will take a minor league deal. If they can't reasonably be expected to be better than the group of 4/5's with options then we shouldn't commit a rotation slot. Depth/flyer guys should be exactly that.

[Docwaukee]

I'm thinking something more along the lines of Scott Downs with his lower arm slot, 90-ish fastball and effective chance/slider. 

 

His scouting report over at MWAH will be published in a couple of days.  But in a gist, he gets by because he's smart. Moves in-out, up-down, works backwards, strange arm angle, hides the ball well, very good command despite K/9 (he's a nibbler), good slider and change up. 

 

I don't see it working across more than 3 innings in AAA because of the environment (will minimize the breaks in both his slider and change) or in the majors because of the talent and refinement.,  But I think he'll be absolutely death on lefties. 

Isn't that kind of similar to what you said about Michael Roth? Yet, Deloach is 6'6", 240 and has a fastball in the 91-94 range with deception.  I've never seen the kid pitch, so I don't know but it just seems odd to me that he could have that level of success and only be considered a LOOGY.  

 

The way you describe him, he seems more like a early version of CJ Wilson.   

[Second Base]

I'm not sure where you read that DeLoach's fastball is 91-94, but if that were the case I think I would be more bullish in him as a prospect. I think as a reliever, 91-92 would likely be the norm. As a starter, when I've watched him, it was mostly 89-90.

Yeah, Roth was really good in AA last year and every bit earned his way back into the conversation at the major league level. They gave him another chance and he unfortunately didn't pitch up to his ability. As with all soft tossing lefties there's the chance that none of it translates to the major league level.

I think what sets DeLoach apart is the angle at which he attacks lefties (picture Roth but 6 inches further behind a LHB), the fact that he pitches rather than throws and his strong K profile.

[Docwaukee]

I'm not sure where you read that DeLoach's fastball is 91-94, but if that were the case I think I would be more bullish in him as a prospect. I think as a reliever, 91-92 would likely be the norm. As a starter, when I've watched him, it was mostly 89-90.

Yeah, Roth was really good in AA last year and every bit earned his way back into the conversation at the major league level. They gave him another chance and he unfortunately didn't pitch up to his ability. As with all soft tossing lefties there's the chance that none of it translates to the major league level.

I think what sets DeLoach apart is the angle at which he attacks lefties (picture Roth but 6 inches further behind a LHB), the fact that he pitches rather than throws and his strong K profile.

I must have misread that somewhere.  never mind.  

[Angelsjunky]

Anyone see this?

 

http://www.halosheaven.com/2014/12/23/7440011/will-angels-trade-c-j-wilson-to-marlins-for-dan-haren

 

 

A good idea. Let's say the Angels have to eat $15-20M of the $38M owed to CJ over the next two years. That would still give them another $10M or so of breathing room in each of the next two years. So over the next two years you have the following rotations:

 

2015: Richards, Weaver, Shoemaker, Haren, Heaney

2016: Richards, Weaver, Shoemaker, Heaney, Skaggs

[Troll Daddy]

Anyone see this?

http://www.halosheaven.com/2014/12/23/7440011/will-angels-trade-c-j-wilson-to-marlins-for-dan-haren

A good idea. Let's say the Angels have to eat $15-20M of the $38M owed to CJ over the next two years. That would still give them another $10M or so of breathing room in each of the next two years. So over the next two years you have the following rotations:

2015: Richards, Weaver, Shoemaker, Haren, Heaney

2016: Richards, Weaver, Shoemaker, Heaney, Skaggs

Good stuff

I'd still prefer Wilson in 2015 over Haren.

Do fans actually still visit that website?

Edited December 31, 2014 by Troll Daddy

[Angelsjunky]

I'd probably prefer Wilson over Haren in that he has more upside, if a slightly lower floor, but the question is more whether what would serve the Angels better:

 

1) Wilson

2) Haren + ~$20ish million

 

I'd say the latter.

 

Also, what's wrong with Halos Heaven?

Edited December 31, 2014 by Angelsjunky

[Stradling]

Of course you're right AJ. It's not about Wilson vs Haren, it's about Wilson vs Haren and more flexibility. As for HalosHeaven I've never visited that site except by clicking links from this site.

Edited December 31, 2014 by Stradling

[Angelsjunky]

Of course you're right AJ. It's not about Wilson vs CJ Haren, it's about Wilson vs CJ Haren and more flexibility. As for HalosHeaven I've never visited that site except by clicking links from this site.

 

 

I think you meant the above?

[Stradling]

Wow, I totally blew that entire post.

[Second Base]

The funny thing, everyone is still ignoring Tropeano. The Angels intend to have him in the rotation, believe it or not. And he's actually really good.

It wouldn't surprise me at all to see the Angels roll out Richards, Weaver, Shoemaker, Tropeano and Heaney.

[Cdaniel]

The funny thing, everyone is still ignoring Tropeano. The Angels intend to have him in the rotation, believe it or not. And he's actually really good.

It wouldn't surprise me at all to see the Angels roll out Richards, Weaver, Shoemaker, Tropeano and Heaney.

Is that with Wilson being traded?

[Troll Daddy]

The funny thing, everyone is still ignoring Tropeano. The Angels intend to have him in the rotation, believe it or not. And he's actually really good.

It wouldn't surprise me at all to see the Angels roll out Richards, Weaver, Shoemaker, Tropeano and Heaney.

 

I would be totally shocked but will get some answers come ST.

[Docwaukee]

It would surprise me if Wilson didn't at least get the opportunity to start the season in the rotation

[Jim]

'The pitching staff is deep'

You're assuming that Wilson and the young prospects are going to pull their weight.

I'm not ...

I believe Dipoto is looking for a top rotation pitcher not a reclamation project.

I agree way too many assumptions about our current SP staff. Adding a front of the rotation starter will legitimize our starting rotation as we begin the season. But it won’t be the end if Dipoto cannot achieve such a goal. We could start the season with our current staff and be competitive.  

[Angelsjunky]

The funny thing, everyone is still ignoring Tropeano. The Angels intend to have him in the rotation, believe it or not. And he's actually really good.

It wouldn't surprise me at all to see the Angels roll out Richards, Weaver, Shoemaker, Tropeano and Heaney.

 

I'm not ignoring Tropeano at all and have even voiced a similar sentiment, that with the Heaney trade Tropeano is getting lost in the mix. I equate it to Skaggs and Shoemaker going into 2014, with Heaney playing the role of Skaggs and Tropeano being Shoemaker. I think he's ready to be a serviceable #4-5 starter, with the potential to be a #3. With less expectation than Heaney, he might be better situated to hold his own right away. I just don't think the Angels are going to start the year with both Trope and Heaney in the rotation, and Heaney has the higher upside.

 

That said, you could be right - but only if Wilson is traded and/or Richards isn't ready. Even then, don't forget about Santiago.

 

To go into it a bit more, in terms of likelihood to start the year in the rotation, assuming Richards is healthy I see it as follows:

 

Key

5: a lock barring injury

4: probable but with some questions

3: a good chance - in the running for a spot

2: maybe, but only if everyone else fails

1: true disaster would have to strike

 

5: Richards, Weaver, Shoemaker

4: Wilson

3: Heaney, Tropeano

2: Santiago, Rasmus

1: Rucinski, Alvarez, Sanabia, etc

 

Again, this is in terms of making the starting five out of the gate. Anything could happen down the line.