Go get Chris Archer

[tomsred]

Archer should sign with the Braves, and they should have gotten Rodney to go along with him.  It's a match made in early American history.

[Jeff Fletcher]

3 hours ago, Dtwncbad said:

Jeff one of my concerns is, in my opinion, none of the Angels pitching prospects have a very high ceiling.  Canning maybe a #3?

So even if you gave the Rays four pitching prospects for Archer, it makes sense for the Angels to do it.

Does it really make any sense for the Angels to hoard pitching prospects that all end up #4s and #5s?

And this is where the question is really answered.  Do the Rays really think they are going to be able to actually compete?  If they legitimately want to build a true winner, the Angels probably are not trade partners because of the modest ceilings of the Angel pitching prospects.  But If they want a high number of respectable, controllable bodies to contribute to a team that is "competitive" then the Angels are potential trade partners.

If the Rays did land a couple of truly dynamic budding stars, can they even build around them?  If not then wouldn't they be interested in getting 80% of a future rotation for Archer?

Well if you think the Angels pitching prospects don’t have value to the Angels, then they probably don’t have value to the Rays either, so what are we talking about?

If these teams were going to have a match, it would be because of the Angels position players. 

[Dtwncbad]

28 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

Well if you think the Angels pitching prospects don’t have value to the Angels, then they probably don’t have value to the Rays either, so what are we talking about?

If these teams were going to have a match, it would be because of the Angels position players. 

I didn't say they don't have value.  I said I dont see a top half of the rotation starter in the group.  The Angels arguably don't need a whole wave of back half of the rotation starters.  A team that doesn't like to spend and may be settling for just being competitive, might like having that wave of arms coming.

[Second Base]

So the basic conclusion we've reached has been rehashed a few times in this thread.

1. Archer is really good.

2. The Angels are a better team with Archer (everyone is).

3. The Angels have the pieces for Archer.

4. The Rays asking price will be extremely high.

5. It's probably best if the Angels didn't make that trade.

[WeatherWonk]

I thought the part you were kidding about is Heaney having much better results than Archer. 

[WeatherWonk]

9 hours ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

I think the Angels would.

As for starting an Archer trade with Heaney, maybe. He's got 4 years of control, the same as Archer, and they are cheaper than Archer. Of course, he may be nowhere near as good as Archer. That's why you have to throw in a few other guys.

Heaney, Canning and Jones or Adell is probably something that would make the Rays listen.

I would absolutely go and get Archer if that is all it took. Like someone mentioned, his FIP and xFIP were still considered above average last year. Heck, even ERAs just barely over 4.00 is not bad in the suddenly homer-happy environment of the last two years. Especially pitching all those games in BAL  and NY.

Yeah, those guys represent top tier prospects in our farm system. But we are still considered in the bottom-five farms systems in baseball, aren't we? How much value are we really giving up for four years of Archer? And Archer is only about 2.5 years old than Heany.

[Warfarin]

1 hour ago, WeatherWonk said:

I would absolutely go and get Archer if that is all it took. Like someone mentioned, his FIP and xFIP were still considered above average last year. Heck, even ERAs just barely over 4.00 is not bad in the suddenly homer-happy environment of the last two years. Especially pitching all those games in BAL  and NY.

Yeah, those guys represent top tier prospects in our farm system. But we are still considered in the bottom-five farms systems in baseball, aren't we? How much value are we really giving up for four years of Archer? And Archer is only about 2.5 years old than Heany.

I agree.  If that's all it took for Archer, then I'd definitely go for it.

Would it hurt?  Sure, we'd be losing one of our prospects (Jones or Adell), but OF is an area of surplus for us, so it'd make the hit less.  It would likewise hurt to lose Canning, but we'd be adding a strong #2 / possible #1 who costs 4.25mil AAV/year.  This means in addition to acquiring Archer, we could also go out and sign another FA to fill another significant hole.  In truth, we could probably even stunningly sign Darvish (assuming no more than 20mil AAV) AND still keep our team a bit below the luxury tax level.  We'd have a rotation of:  Archer, Darvish, Richards, Ohtani, Skaggs, and Shoemaker (assuming a "6-man" rotation), with Tropeano, Barria, JC Ramirez, and Bridwell ALL serving as depth.

We'd have one of the top rotations in the game, the best defense in the game, one of the best framing catchers in the game, an underrated bullpen, and *at least* an average offense, if not better.  We'd be legitimate World Series contenders.

[arch stanton]

The question you have to ask is whether that rotation is really that much better than a rotation where Heaney replaces Archer in the equation. The 2018 team is relying on at least 5 and probably 6 veteran position players playing 150 games each with a fairly weak bench. I'd rather have the organizational currency available if a real hole gets exposed along the way instead of spending it to slightly upgrade a position we don't have a clear picture on just yet

[Warfarin]

16 minutes ago, arch stanton said:

The question you have to ask is whether that rotation is really that much better than a rotation where Heaney replaces Archer in the equation. The 2018 team is relying on at least 5 and probably 6 veteran position players playing 150 games each with a fairly weak bench. I'd rather have the organizational currency available if a real hole gets exposed along the way instead of spending it to slightly upgrade a position we don't have a clear picture on just yet

I get what you are saying, but I think you are underselling Archer by saying he is just a "slight upgrade" over Heaney.  Heaney has promise, but since his good half-season with us in 2015, he had a major surgery.  If the trade package of Heaney, Canning, and either Jones or Adell is what it took to get Archer, then that's worth it to me, considering how ridiculously cheap Archer is and the immense value he brings with that cheap contract.  Having that cheap contract enables them to add to the bench if they want to, because Archer consumes such a small amount of payroll.

[ELEVEN]

On 12/26/2017 at 2:19 PM, totdprods said:

And, FWIW, not advocating this, but....

3-yr averages:

Archer (101 G, No TJS): 205 IP, 3.77 ERA, 107 ERA+, 3.36 FIP, 1.21 WHIP, 8.1 H9, 1.1 HR9, 2.8 BB9, 10.8 K9

Darvish (70 G, TJS): 144 IP, 3.48 ERA, 125 ERA+, 3.33 FIP, 1.19 WHIP, 7.8 H9, 1.1 HR9, 2.9 BB9, 10.9 K9

It's crazy how similar there numbers are. Darvish is gonna cost ya $100m+ more and is older, but he's also already gone through TJS whereas Archer still runs that risk. And zero prospects spent. Not to mention the X Factor of what Yu's influence with Ohtani could be.

In fact, if it was one or the other, I'd just sign Darvish and be done with it. Yeah it'd top out payroll and be a risky deal, but we keep farm intact and give ourselves same shot at winning that Archer would have, if not very since we keep other players for boosting the MLB club or using for deadline deals. Let Eppler work his magic on cheap pen help if Darvish maxes us out, or use some of our dozen starters in the pen. We'll clear some space next year with Kinsler, Valbuena, Johnson, and Wood going and likely one of Richards, Shoe, Skaggs, Cron, Heaney, Ramirez expendable. Calhoun could be too if Jones or Hermosillo come on strong. 

F Yu

We got Yu?

[Lou]

On 12/26/2017 at 10:26 AM, Dtwncbad said:

Just go get him.  The Angels have more than enough ammunition to make a deal without it really hurting the future.

Give them one or more of the controllable major league starters and add prospects not in the Angels top 10.

It would be hard for them to turn down two guys to put in their rotation plus a couple of prospects.

I dont want to argue my personal choices for who I would be willing to send to TB.  Rather, my point is the Angels have lots of depth at SP now plus some pitching prospects in the rankings from #10ish to #20ish that should be enough to get it done.

Archer, Richards, Ohtani, Skaggs, Heaney.

That is a rotation.  Sure keep a couple if others for depth but anyone not listed in tjat rotation is surplus and should be candidates to be used to make this team better.

I agree

[Stradling]

On 12/27/2017 at 7:47 PM, WeatherWonk said:

I would absolutely go and get Archer if that is all it took. Like someone mentioned, his FIP and xFIP were still considered above average last year. Heck, even ERAs just barely over 4.00 is not bad in the suddenly homer-happy environment of the last two years. Especially pitching all those games in BAL  and NY.

Yeah, those guys represent top tier prospects in our farm system. But we are still considered in the bottom-five farms systems in baseball, aren't we? How much value are we really giving up for four years of Archer? And Archer is only about 2.5 years old than Heany.

@Lou this one is even better.  Considering it is in response to the Angels giving up Heaney, Canning and either Adell or Jones to get Archer.  

@Lou agrees.

[VariousCrap]

Lou must have been bored again.

[Lou]

lol 

[Lou]

Just now, VariousCrap said:

Lou must have been bored again.

Have you read the board?

[Inside Pitch]

5.06 ERA since the trade.   This one has turned ugly....  Possibly in the running for worst trade in a decade.

Also, TY Lou for keeping it fun on off days.

[AngelsLakersFan]

I agree with the OP. I think now is the time to go get em