Are they done?

[totdprods]

6 hours ago, Dochalo said:

I could see us signing Wieters at this point.  Trade Perez for a prospect.  He's had some mixed reviews framing but he'd be a nice offensive player to have behind the dish.  

I think they'd be better off stashing Perez in SLC. He's probably worth more to us than whatever prospect he'd bring back. 

I'd keep an eye on Saltalamacchia too. Eppler was interested in him last offseason also, possibly even after we had signed Soto. I'd consider Valbuena over Marte at this point too. Depth is a good thing. Focus should be on pitchers though still.

[tdawg87]

Not a huge fan of Wieters. He'd be an improvement over Perez, sure, but not by as much as you think. Wieters had a 1.7 WAR last year in 464 PA's. Perez has a 1.7 WAR as an Angel in just a little over 100 more plate appearances. 

Perez had a .236 BABIP in 2016, so he suffered from quite a bit of bad luck in his poor offensive showing. I think he's much closer to his 2015 numbers, which saw him put up an 82 OPS+. That is not good by any stretch, but Wieters put up an 87 OPS+ in 2016 so...

[totdprods]

15 minutes ago, tdawg87 said:

Not a huge fan of Wieters. He'd be an improvement over Perez, sure, but not by as much as you think. Wieters had a 1.7 WAR last year in 464 PA's. Perez has a 1.7 WAR as an Angel in just a little over 100 more plate appearances. 

Perez had a .236 BABIP in 2016, so he suffered from quite a bit of bad luck in his poor offensive showing. I think he's much closer to his 2015 numbers, which saw him put up an 82 OPS+. That is not good by any stretch, but Wieters put up an 87 OPS+ in 2016 so...

Yeah I'm not crazy about Wieters either, but if any of these guys started dropping to one-year commitments (Wieters, Bautista, Saunders, Valbuena, even the Utley-types) I'd be interested. It's pretty hard to eff up a team's financial situation with one year deals, and even with all their warts, any one of those guys has enough track record that it's not impossible for one or two of them have a big season - either by desire to rebound, to score a better contract next year, or just pure fluke luck. And for the most part, they aren't blocking anyone on the MLB club. Marte, Perez, and Cron are the only real young players who would be affected.

The way I see it, any vet on a one-year deal is a tradeable asset really at any point in the year. Even Spring Training. And even if the return is a fringe prospect, that prospect would still probably land in the #20-#30 range in our farm. While I fully believe this team could not only contend but also perform well in the playoffs, my expectations are not so high that I wouldn't be willing to sacrifice the first couple months of the year to run out a bunch of these one-year deal vet types over Marte, Perez (and possibly Cron*) to see if any of these one-year vets have a big rebound.

They either turn into a bargain and enhance our playoff chances, turn into trade bait for our starved farm (or even turn into FA compensation in offseason), or suck and get cut/benched midway without having really affected much.

*I can only see Cron being affected with if Bautista was signed - he'd be the only FA worth the gamble, and he'd more than likely be traded rather than benched or demoted.

 

[Troll Daddy]

I see a big difference between Perez and Weiters. Using WAR as a evaluator is just wrong imo.

I would sign him for three years or just pass. 

[Stradling]

Why?  That makes zero sense.  If you could sign him for two years you wouldn't do it?  

[Docwaukee]

4 minutes ago, Troll Daddy said:

I see a big difference between Perez and Weiters. Using WAR as a evaluator is just wrong imo.

I would sign him for three years or just pass. 

why don't you explain to us why you think it wrong.

[Blarg]

WAR doesn't effectively describe a catchers abilities and is more wieghted on offensive capabilities over the main responsibility of being a defender.

[Troll Daddy]

52 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

why don't you explain to us why you think it wrong.

Would it help you understand ... do you honestly believe that GM's use WAR to make roster decisions. Anyways, you know how I feel on the subject and I know how you feel. It's not worth discussing ... 

 

 

 

[eligrba]

The Angels need a catcher who can call an effective game, help the young pitchers develop, throw out enough runners to make teams think that stealing bases is a gamble, and produce league average offensive numbers.

If Wieters does those thing better than anyone on the Angels roster, that it is probably worth pursuing.  I do not know enough about Wieters to say yes or no.

[Stradling]

34 minutes ago, Troll Daddy said:

Would it help you understand ... do you honestly believe that GM's use WAR to make roster decisions. Anyways, you know how I feel on the subject and I know how you feel. It's not worth discussing ... 

 

 

 

I would assume that every team uses a proprietary version of WAR to value players they are going to pursue.  It may not be WAR persay but their own version of it.  I also would assume the teams that are more saber inclined would have a team WAR type of stat that shows overall impact of player A on the lineup and defense versus player B.  But do I think GMs look and say, "we need to add this guy because he had a 2.5 WAR" no I don't think they do that.  I think it is more like, "This player in our line up would help provide 20 more runs and save 10 more runs than the player we currently have and that could get us 3 more wins."

[Docwaukee]

1 hour ago, Blarg said:

WAR doesn't effectively describe a catchers abilities and is more wieghted on offensive capabilities over the main responsibility of being a defender.

I know that.  I just want him to give some sort of explanation why he thinks WAR is bad even though he doesn't understand it.  

[Troll Daddy]

22 minutes ago, Stradling said:

I would assume that every team uses a proprietary version of WAR to value players they are going to pursue.  It may not be WAR persay but their own version of it.  I also would assume the teams that are more saber inclined would have a team WAR type of stat that shows overall impact of player A on the lineup and defense versus player B.  But do I think GMs look and say, "we need to add this guy because he had a 2.5 WAR" no I don't think they do that.  I think it is more like, "This player in our line up would help provide 20 more runs and save 10 more runs than the player we currently have and that could get us 3 more wins."

That scenario may start a conversation but realistically you look much deeper. The player you're talking about is easily targeted without looking at his WAR or various type of WAR equations. 

To me WAR is a cheat sheet stat not to be fully trusted. I have no problem with fans who believe in its value. 

I like Weiters mainly for his offense if I'm being honest. I think his defense is manageable. 

[Docwaukee]

1 hour ago, Troll Daddy said:

Would it help you understand ... do you honestly believe that GM's use WAR to make roster decisions. Anyways, you know how I feel on the subject and I know how you feel. It's not worth discussing ... 

 

 

 

GM's use the information obtained from their team of sabermetrics folks.  That team takes proprietary data and likely puts it into a format that is easily understandable based on the gm's baseline for that type of information.  It's probably not the version of WAR as we know it but some version of it that they have created.  Does their proprietary version contain all the things that fWAR does?  Absolutely.  Do they us the statcast info to formulate value assessments for defense?  Do they use park factors and BABIP and k/bb ratios and exit velocity?  or spin rate for pitchers?  100%.  Do they look at how many RBI's and runs generated by individual players?  I doubt it.  They look for sustainable metrics to assess player value.  Does it tell them the whole story?  No.  But I guarantee they have some sort of projection system internally where they predict run prevention by Espinosa moving to 2b or Maybin to LF.  

One clue as to their use of advanced metrics is trading for Maldonado and Maybin and Espinosa.  Do you think they just scribble some shit on a cocktail napkin?  

I get that you like the old school part of the game.  So do I.  I enjoy when the real part of the game takes over and teams blow their projections out of the water or fail when they shouldn't have.  

Metrics create a better foundation.  A more accurate starting point.  They don't predict the future.  They don't account for that nagging hangnail or if a player is unhappy with his home life.  

to disregard something because it isn't perfect is short-sighted beyond belief.  If you understand it then you know it's shortcomings and where it can provide value as well as more importantly, where it doesn't.  

As an example, you see Weiters as an offensive upgrade over Maldonado which is probably true.  But just using one example as an important factor to determine that - his home park and the other parks in the AL east.  Angel Stadium kills LHed power.  Do you not think Eppler is taking into account that fact when determining whether the potential offensive upgrade Wieters brings is really going to come to fruition?  

[Angel Oracle]

How soon before the FA relievers start to be scooped up?

Five weeks until pitchers/catchers report

[ettin]

27 minutes ago, Angel Oracle said:

How soon before the FA relievers start to be scooped up?

Five weeks until pitchers/catchers report

Someone is itchin' for a reliever eh?

[Troll Daddy]

3 hours ago, Dochalo said:

GM's use the information obtained from their team of sabermetrics folks.  That team takes proprietary data and likely puts it into a format that is easily understandable based on the gm's baseline for that type of information.  It's probably not the version of WAR as we know it but some version of it that they have created.  Does their proprietary version contain all the things that fWAR does?  Absolutely.  Do they us the statcast info to formulate value assessments for defense?  Do they use park factors and BABIP and k/bb ratios and exit velocity?  or spin rate for pitchers?  100%.  Do they look at how many RBI's and runs generated by individual players?  I doubt it.  They look for sustainable metrics to assess player value.  Does it tell them the whole story?  No.  But I guarantee they have some sort of projection system internally where they predict run prevention by Espinosa moving to 2b or Maybin to LF.  

One clue as to their use of advanced metrics is trading for Maldonado and Maybin and Espinosa.  Do you think they just scribble some shit on a cocktail napkin?  

I get that you like the old school part of the game.  So do I.  I enjoy when the real part of the game takes over and teams blow their projections out of the water or fail when they shouldn't have.  

Metrics create a better foundation.  A more accurate starting point.  They don't predict the future.  They don't account for that nagging hangnail or if a player is unhappy with his home life.  

to disregard something because it isn't perfect is short-sighted beyond belief.  If you understand it then you know it's shortcomings and where it can provide value as well as more importantly, where it doesn't.  

As an example, you see Weiters as an offensive upgrade over Maldonado which is probably true.  But just using one example as an important factor to determine that - his home park and the other parks in the AL east.  Angel Stadium kills LHed power.  Do you not think Eppler is taking into account that fact when determining whether the potential offensive upgrade Wieters brings is really going to come to fruition?  

I get it ... just not interested (old school). I know saber metrics is being used by all teams. I not debating it's usefulness ... more so it's accuracy. 

btw Garret Anderson did ok ... let's not forget the team is looking for a LH bat

I'm ok if the Angels stand pat at the catcher position ... I think