Cowart

[stormngt]

14 hours ago, ScottyA_MWAH said:

Honestly?  Richards, Shoe, Skaggs, Nolasco, Meyer, Smith for sure.....Banuelos, O'Grady possibly.  Even if you don't count Richards and Shoemaker because of their injuries this year (yet expected clean bill of health to begin next year), there's still at minimum, five starters that are better than Weaver.

But more importantly (at least to me), replacing Weaver with a younger, lower cost alternative that actually has upside makes sense for the fiscal standing of this organization.  If they don't think 2017 is the year we compete then why not let the kids take a chance, we might actually find something valuable.  And even if we do want to compete in 2017, I don't think Weaver's five and a half ERA classifies as competitive.

I am not surprised I would get a lo of flak from my statement, and in fact I expected it.  Scotty and Aces you make good points and list pitchers that you say are better.  It doesn't surprise me that hanger couldn't give me a list, but just says he sucks.  I know he sucks, I want to know who we have that is better.

 

I agree with Richards, but are you guaranteeing he is going to be healthy is ready to do?  For some reason I keep thinking about Morales and how we didn't need to replace him because he was supposed to be back at full strength the next year and in fact he couldn't play in year two. 

The same arguments goes for Skaggs and Shoemaker.  Although I think the risk of re-injury on Skaggs is a little less than Richard.  As for Shoemaker, there is the physical problems that probably will heal without any issue, but there is also the psychological ones.  After almost dying getting hit by a pitch, psychological anxiety is immense when you get 60 feet away from a batter again.  Now Shoe already had inconsistencies to begin with.  I think its foolish to rely on Shoemaker making a full recovery.  I pray that he does, but it is a serious question mark if he is able to pitch again.

Nolasco sucks!  You claim he is obviously better than Weaver, and I argue he is on the same level.  Both seemed to get shelled at a regular basis and occasionally pitch a good game.  YES stat geeks I am sure you going to throw some sabre metric stats at me showing how Nolasco is better than Weaver.  I think they both suck.  Forgive me if I like Weaver over Nolasco.

Meyer?  They don't even know if Meyer is good enough to be a starter instead of a relief pitcher. 

Smith?  The same guy they just shut down with arm trouble?  Didn't someone say he got shelled in AAA.  Yes, he is probably better, but really are we counting on him?

Banueles, O'Grady you say possible.

Look, I am not suggesting we give Weaver a multi year extension or pay him a big contract.  I don't think he should be guaranteed a starting spot.  I just don't think we have much better and we have a lot of question marks.  We could sign a free agent pitcher but he will probably cost 15 million a year and Weaver would probably be closer to 1 or 2.  We could go with the Rookies and hope and pray.  They are cheaper.  But even with going with the Rookies, who are sure things?

Skaggs, Smith, Meyer, (you say possibly Banueles and O'Grady)  I think Nolasco sucks and is on the same level of Weaver.  But even with him you have 4 starting pitchers and you need 5 to make a MLB rotation and you need depth.

[Angel Oracle]

I don't want to see Wilson within 10 miles of a Halos mound from now on.

How many starts did he miss since 2012?

[totdprods]

Is everyone still hot to trade Escobar for whatever we can get so Cowart can be the full-time starter at 3B?

Should we start a Weaver/Rotation thread?

[stormngt]

1 hour ago, hangin n wangin said:

 

I did give a list. Do you read?

Also, Smith just has tendinitis. It's not a long term thing. So yes, we are counting on him. And yes, he is better than Weaver.

Speaking of reading:

At t he end of my post I put a list of clear cut better pitchers

Skaggs, Smith, and Meyer

Who else?

Richard? question on  him be able to avoid TJ

Shoe:?  questions being able to return from a near fatal injury

According to Scotty there is:  Nolasco (who sucks and I believe sucks worse than Weaver), maybe Buenales, and O'Grady.  You added Scriber who I don't know much about, and you added OberIsuckholtzer.  He sucks and I believe is not much better than Weaver.

Also since we were told Richards only was dehydrated how much should we trust the "tendinitis" issue?

[Angel Oracle]

I have to admit that Weave's start on Monday didn't leave me feeling warm and fuzzy.

[Troll Daddy]

Eppler knows pitching better than most of us. I'll put my trust in his hands. 

Doesn't matter if Weaver is better than Nolasco. Dodgers will sign Weaver anyways ... just because they can. 

[stormngt]

1 hour ago, hangin n wangin said:

Ok, so I listed people who are realistic options, but you are just dismissing them because you obviously have an attachment to Weaver. Weaver has absolutely no upside. NONE. He throws 82 MPH and has been one of the worst starting pitchers in baseball this year and he is declining year by year. Scriber and O'Grady have more upside and are worth a shot to see what they have.

Oberholtzer is not a good pitcher. Everyone knows it. But he has a career ERA of 4.30, which is significantly better than what Weaver has posted with his pathetic fastball the past 2 years.

Believe what you want regarding Nate Smith, but according to reports, he has tendinitis and it isn't anything long term, so I'm going to believe what the report is on him for now. If you want to believe he has a torn UCL, good for you.

Nolasco is not a good pitcher, but where on this fucking earth do you get the idea that he is worse than Weaver? Worse than Weaver based on what? Certainly not numbers posted this year and pure stuff.

2015 Stats:

Weaver

-0.3 WAR

5.37 ERA

5.78 FIP

4.78 K/9

Nolasco:

1.9 WAR

4.90 ERA

4.30 FIP

6.59 K/9

Please explain how Weaver is a better bet than Nolasco going forward. What are you basing your statement on?

Also, you are failing to understand we don't have to go with just the guys myself and Scotty listed. Other players will become available later for the league minimum that we can take a look at. There is just absolutely no point in bringing back a 34 year old pitcher with the slowest starting velocity in baseball who posted a mid 5 ERA.

What are you basing you statements that you think Weaver is better than these pitchers listed? Because numbers certainly don't agree with what you are saying.

But numbers don't matter right? They are just stats. So we should just put Weaver in the rotation because you think he's better than Nolasco, "Oberlsuckerholtzer", Scriber, O'Grady, etc. based on well.....absolutely no proof or evidence.

First gets some comprehension I just said we don't have a lot of clearly better than Weaver.  You understand if player A isn't clearly better it player B doesn't mean I am saying B is better.  Not clearly better means just that.

Second if you are using Nolasco's career stats  thsn isnt it fair to compare those with Weavers career stats.  

Third, Oberholtzer has a grand total of 2 quality starts the last two years.  Weaver is tied with Santiago with 11.  Nolasco has one quality start with the last two years.  THAT IS WHY I SAID THEY ARE NOT CLEARLY BETTER THAN WEAVER!

I did say in my original post some stat geek would refute my arguments with some stats.  Sorry some stats don't tell the whole picture.  I know quality starts are not considered as a good indicator.  However despite WAR, FIP, or whatever Saber metrics numbers you throw at me if player A pitches into the 7th inning giving up 3 runs or less more often than player B than logical conclusion is player A is giving the team a better chance to win than player A.

Stat geeks can lose common sense as they crunch all their numbers.

And Yes I like Weaver a he'll of a lot more than Nolasco or Oberholtzer.  All three suck so If they are close to each other in will side with Weaver.

 

 

[stormngt]

1 hour ago, Angel Oracle said:

I have to admit that Weave's start on Monday didn't leave me feeling warm and fuzzy.

Did Nolasco's or Oberholtzer performance give you a warm feeling?

[Troll Daddy]

I thought Nolasco's last two starts were ... quality starts?

[Angel Oracle]

52 minutes ago, stormngt said:

Did Nolasco's or Oberholtzer performance give you a warm feeling?

Oberholzer's starts left me feeling ill.    Nolasco's past two starts were nice to see, but yes were also only about 6% of the starts he would make in an entire season.

[Ace-Of-Diamonds]

4 hours ago, stormngt said:

I agree with Richards, but are you guaranteeing he is going to be healthy is ready to do?  For some reason I keep thinking about Morales and how we didn't need to replace him because he was supposed to be back at full strength the next year and in fact he couldn't play in year two. 

Richards is probably going to pitch in the AFL this year and maybe winter ball as well. That should give us an idea of his capabilities. Ever since May Shoemaker's ERA is in the 3.0 neighborhood. All indications are he will be ready to go come spring. Nolasco has been decent since becoming an Angel. Meyer pitched OK yesterday, he got into trouble with walks but got himself out of them with Ks. I guess I'm just a little more optimistic than some. Without all the injuries this season, I feel we would have been in the running for the wild card at least.

[stormngt]

15 minutes ago, Ace-Of-Diamonds said:

Richards is probably going to pitch in the AFL this year and maybe winter ball as well. That should give us an idea of his capabilities. Ever since May Shoemaker's ERA is in the 3.0 neighborhood. All indications are he will be ready to go come spring. Nolasco has been decent since becoming an Angel. Meyer pitched OK yesterday, he got into trouble with walks but got himself out of them with Ks. I guess I'm just a little more optimistic than some. Without all the injuries this season, I feel we would have been in the running for the wild card at least.

Your right about Richards.  We should see before the season where he is at.  Nolasco last two starts haven't been bad, but Weaver has had a few starts as well.  Maybe I am just overly pessimistic about him.  Meyer I have in our top 3.  Shoe I am very concerned because there is more than one instance which a pitcher got hit in the head and never fully recovered.  Granted physically he will be fine, but psychological who knows.

Still by adding Nolasco we only gives us four.  Granted Richard and Shoe healthy we are a better situation.

Most really isn't comprehending what I am suggestingoing.  Best case scenario we are healthy and don't need and can't use Weaver.  But shit happens and I believe we have to be prepared.  Obviously if Meyers pitches up to ability, Richardso healthy, Shoemaker healthy, Smith healthy, Oberholtzer goes from shitty and lives up to his potential it would be stupid to pitch Weaver in front of him.  But I see nothing wrong with one year extension at a bargain price in order to make sure we have the depth.

It would be a gamble like us signing Lincecum this year.  Now if it would push over the salary cap I would agree I would agree with Scotty and suggest go with Rookies.

[Angelsjunky]

My worry about the rotation next year, and why I'm not opposed to bringing Weaver back for a few million--and with the understanding that a full-time gig is not guaranteed--is that the rotation is one question mark after the other. Consider that the following scenario is very possible:

Richards blows out his arm in the AFL or Spring Training, or starts hurting and decides to get TJS and misses the year. Shoemaker could never be the same. If you think that is hyperbolic, consider the language in this article--that he could "plausibly" be ready for Spring Training and will "hopefully" be able to return to "living normally." OK, let's say things don't go well or he just decides its not worth it. And then there's Skaggs, who is all over the place and could continue to struggle.

So we're left with a rotation of mediocre Nolasco, erratic Skaggs, and...Oberholtzer, Meyer, and Banuelos? OK, so it is another rebuilding year, but what about injuries? Why not give those guys a shot and if one gets injured then you have Weaver ready? I just can't get enthused with the driftwood we have in the high minors...Smith, McGowin, Kendrick, Kipper, O'Grady...one Rucinski after another. Long might be a decent #4-5 guy, but he's a year or more away. Barria, Rodriguez look intriguing in A ball, but they're at least 2-3 years away.

Assuming Weaver would even want this, the worst-case scenario is you spend a few million for Weaver to spot start and do mop-up duties. He's now worse than Chacin, plus he's...well, Jered Weaver.

I'm not attached to the idea, I just don't think it is "stupid"--not unless Richards and Shoemaker are 100% healthy and ready to go in ST.

 

[Troll Daddy]

Weaver isn't going to spot start or do any type of mopup duties. 

This place is a frickin riot!

[Oz27]

I've already mentioned Deserved Run Average in this thread, which puts Weaver as historically bad (like many other stats do). Baseball Prospectus also measures a stat called cFIP, a contextualised version of FIp which is explained here - http://www.hardballtimes.com/fip-in-context/

Anyway, the score works similarly to ERA minus, where 100 is average and every point above or below it you are ranks how far away you are from league average. Weaver scores 150 on it, which means he is 50 per cent worse than the average major league pitcher. To illustrate just how bad this is, he is the worst in baseball by nine per cent. There are no qualifiers on that. Even including scrubs who played one game and got shelled, that is how much worse he is than the rest of the league. How bad is that historically? I had to go back to 1995 to find any pitcher who has been worse and that is some scrub reliever I've never heard of named Rob Dibble who had a 2.333 WHIP in 15 games. So by one measure he is having the worst major league season in 21 years. How the f**k is bringing him back something some people are suggesting while managing to keep a straight face?

I appreciate everything Weaver did for us. He was once great. But it's hard to exaggerate how bad he has been this year. It's over and we all need to move on.

[Troll Daddy]

Let's remember that the 'devil' is his agent. He will sign a incentive laden contract as a starter ... if he decides to keep the circus going. 

If anybody can find a team for Weaver ... it's Borass.

[Troll Daddy]

6 minutes ago, Oz27 said:

I've already mentioned Deserved Run Average in this thread, which puts Weaver as historically bad (like many other stats do). Baseball Prospectus also measures a stat called cFIP, a contextualised version of FIp which is explained here - http://www.hardballtimes.com/fip-in-context/

Anyway, the score works similarly to ERA minus, where 100 is average and every point above or below it you are ranks how far away you are from league average. Weaver scores 150 on it, which means he is 50 per cent worse than the average major league pitcher. To illustrate just how bad this is, he is the worst in baseball by nine per cent. There are no qualifiers on that. Even including scrubs who played one game and got shelled, that is how much worse he is than the rest of the league. How bad is that historically? I had to go back to 1995 to find any pitcher who has been worse and that is some scrub reliever I've never heard of named Rob Dibble who had a 2.333 WHIP in 15 games. So by one measure he is having the worst major league season in 21 years. How the f**k is bringing him back something some people are suggesting while managing to keep a straight face?

I appreciate everything Weaver did for us. He was once great. But it's hard to exaggerate how bad he has been this year. It's over and we all need to move on.

I prefer the eye test ... btw, same result  and a lot less time doing research.

I'm proud of you ... no mention of WAR.

[ScottT]

Never heard of Rob Dibble? Did i miss the joke?

I feel a littke old now... but He was on ESPN fairly recently.  

[totdprods]

Ha, so look I will not disagree that Weaver has been dreadfully bad and arguably the worst full-time SP in baseball the last two seasons. Stats, eye-test, etc. back that up. There are plenty of stats that support that. And I am fully aware that all stats are not created equal.

But the quality start % I posted is also a stat. Regardless of how much he sucked in his other 60% starts, Jered 'Worst MLB Pitcher Since '1995' Weaver has gone 6+IP with 3 or less earned runs in 40% of his starts this year (and about the same last year) and in those games, kept his team in position to win and saved the pen some innings in a year where they've thrown an excessive amount.

If I'm bringing Weaver back on a one-year deal for a couple mil, it is not because I think he is good. Or even average. I bring him back literally to be a pitching sponge. I bring him back to offer some shred of durability and stability to the thinnest Angels pitching staff I have seen since I became a fan in '95. I bring him back because I saw Richards, Heaney, Skaggs, Wilson, Tropeano, Smith, Shoemaker, Street, Bedrosian, and Rasmus all spend time on the DL this year. I bring Weaver back so guys like Nate Smith and Manny Banuelos don't try to be heroes if their elbow acts up on a start because they know there isn't any rotation depth in the minors. I bring Weaver back so Richards doesn't push his arm to the limits trying to save the pen because Oberholtzer and Meyer couldn't get past the 4th inning the two nights before and the pen is overworked by mid-May.

Does it have to be Jered Weaver? Absolutely not. But it would be beyond responsible to not bring one more arm into the fold for '17 who isn't capable of just soaking up innings. This is not about Weaver being good or bad. He's bad. It's about offering a buffer - even if just for the first two months of the year - in the rotation so guys that we would like to rely on in '18 and beyond can properly stretch out their pitch counts early in the year. It's to keep us from promoting guys up one level too far too quick because the entire SLC rotation has been called to Anaheim before the All-Star Break. It's to allow someone like Nate Smith to go back to AAA for a couple weeks if he loses his command so his confidence doesn't get ruined in the bigs. I also don't want to see Bedrosian or Guerra hitting their 40th game pitched in late May. I'd like to have those guys in the pen in '18. There will be plenty of opportunity and innings for all the youngsters next year even if Weaver returns.

O'Grady, Scribner, Banuelos, Meyer, Smith may all have tons of talent and long careers ahead of them. But it is very rare for an MLB starter to just arrive and out up 30 starts and 200 IP. I remember Saunders, Santana, Ortiz, Santiago, all needing a AAA breather. Guys like Seth Etherton and Brian Cooper felt rushed and never amounted to anything - and yes, they were never top prospects, but neither really are our current young SPs. Jason Dickson was pushed young and out of baseball shortly after.

So again, does it have to be Weaver? Nope. We could sign Nova or Fister for $60-80m, but that's a lot of dough, and we may not need one of those guys come '18. We could take a one-year flyer on Wilson or Brett Anderson, but they offer just as much injury risk as what we have, and will probably cost more money than Weaver. We could go pluck more Daniel Wright's off waivers, but that's not adding any certain durability or inning-eating. Or we could trade some of our prospects for an arm. Do you want to deal any prospects. Weaver offers very little, but he also costs the least while shoring up some innings.

 

[ten ocho recon scout]

^agreed. 

[totdprods]

Also, resigning Weaver is not my first choice at shoring up the rotation. Just offering up what I believe to be a reasonable argument for why a Weaver resigning would make sense and what benefits it would offer.

I actually would sign a Nova/Fister/Hellickson type if I had the money, or try to pull off some crazy trade for a young, good fairly established MLB starter.

[totdprods]

14 minutes ago, hangin n wangin said:

I disagree but I can respect your position because at least you explain your reasoning in a respectful and well thought out manner.

The other guy saying Nolasco has had only two quality starts in the past two years is obviously a lost cause and you just can't argue with stupid.

Personally, I would rather have anyone else in baseball do a mop up role rather than Weaver because there is no upside to Weaver at this point in his career. He's providing negative value and is constantly declining. Also, we may get lucky and get something out of someone else younger for the future. Weaver has no chance of providing that. But again, I respect your position.

That's also the best argument I have heard against Weaver. Everyone else just says he sucks without acknowledging that he still provides innings and would cost the least to bring into the fold. Or going all tunnel-vision on stats. Jered Weaver has always defied the stats; he did so when he was good, and I feel he is doing so now when he is bad. Is he really bad. Heck yes. But the dude is still somehow managing to weasel away a quality start 40% of the time the last two years, over 53 starts. Either by a crazy amount of luck, Scioscia stubbornness, baseball gods smiling upon He of Pure Baseball Soul, or by sheer willpower, he is still somehow keeping us in the game about half the time.

Part of my argument also hinges on the expectation that he acknowledges he is done halfway through the year once it becomes clear the rotation has stabilized amongst the other 8 guys. 

Basically, I'm selling him as a sacrificial lamb.

[Angelsjunky]

totdprods, we're saying basically the same thing in different ways. Great minds and all, but I guess we're "stupid" for considering it.

[Blarg]

You guys are really working very hard to argue the cause for bringing back a pitcher that would be out right released on any other ball club. He is only playing out his contract at this point because of club loyalty and the Angels being hopelessly out of the running. 

Had not for season ending injuries to Richards ,  Heaney, Shoemaker and Skaggs not being available for half the season,  Weaver would have been DL'ed with a tendinitis or back issue so he could finish the season on the roster. He is no longer a major league pitcher. 

It's time to move on. 

[totdprods]

1 hour ago, Blarg said:

You guys are really working very hard to argue the cause for bringing back a pitcher that would be out right released on any other ball club. He is only playing out his contract at this point because of club loyalty and the Angels being hopelessly out of the running. 

Again, I'm not advocating the resigning of Jered Weaver. I'm advocating the acquisition of a durable vet innings eater who can reliably go 6 innings each turn through the rotation. Another Nolasco. That's all my minimum criteria is for a SP this offseason. Be healthy and have a history of durability and being able to go about 6IP.

I feel that by not bringing in a pitcher like that, we're placing a potentially damaging workload on two groups of pitchers that we really need to develop properly this upcoming season. We need Richards and Meyer to have a full, healthy year. We need one of Banuelos, Oberholtzer, and Smith to at least establish themselves as a back of rotation starter. We need Matt and Tyler to come back strong and consistent. We need Bedrosian, Guerra, and Ramirez to stay on track and not rack up 50 games by the break, and we don't need to rush Middleton, Alcantara, and others like we did with Mahle. We need those guys healthy, developed, and not overworked by 2018, and you can accomplish that by bringing in someone else stable to eat up 150-200 innings. Someone to ease the pressure, offer the depth, and break up a rough week by throwing 6 IP each time out.  The cost of a pitcher like that on the trade market is apparently Hector Santiago. The cost of a pitcher like that on the FA market is basically $12-15m a year, and for multiple years. Jered Weaver is cheaper and less years than both those options. That's all I am saying.

If I were GM, I wouldn't go that route. If I had the available coin, I personally would go grab a Helickson/Fister/Nova guy (after signing a cheap LF or Prado) even if it means a huge glut of SPs in '18. I'm fine with that after what happened this season. Guys can be traded, go to the pen, and pitch in Salt Lake. I want depth. If I didn't have that much money to spend, then I would actually look to trade for a good, young SP (maybe Carlos Perez) or find a sly salary dump. If I didn't have money to spend and didn't find a trade that worked or didn't want to eat into our farm, but I still had that role to fill, then I would look at Jered on a one-year deal for less than $5m, and be up front about needing the role to be no more than an inning-eating, take the punches, mentor the young staff kinda spot. And it'd come with the warning that if by early June there were a couple arms in SLC throwing well, they'd need opportunity at that point, and that spot in the rotation is probably the likeliest to go. If he's fine with that, cool, that's where the intangibles and Angel loyalty and all that feel good yada yada come into play. If he isn't interested in a role like that, well, bye.