In Defense of Eppler

[Docwaukee]

4 minutes ago, mymerlincat said:

It's cute seeing people like you using "well someone else did it too!" as an excuse for Eppler.  To answer your question, if he comes back strong (he will come back in a month or so which, along with ST, should give him time to shake off the dust of being injured) and helps the Padres push for (and possibly make) the playoffs, while being the vet to help the prospects adjust to the majors (and giving them depth so they aren't forced to throw them to the majors prematurely), then yes, I would say it's worth it. 

you're using what has already happened to influence your decision.  I notice you didn't respond to my post about the other teams that made FA mistakes.  The decisions Billy made didn't come with the luxury of knowing what has happened since.  In retro, would I like to have Richards over the guys we signed?  sure.  At the time did it make sense for the Angels?  no.  It would have sent a message that they weren't playing for 2019.  

It's cute watching people like you play monday morning QB on just the Angels moves while ignoring everything else that happened and disregarding what was actually happening at the time.  

Objectivity is such a rarity around this place.  

[Claude]

12 minutes ago, RBM said:

Eppler will $36 M to spend in FA. Maybe more.

No "discount players" this year.

That’s not a lot of money. 

[Lou]

18 minutes ago, mymerlincat said:

It's cute seeing people like you using "well someone else did it too!" as an excuse for Eppler

I never mentioned Eppler.  You might want to work on your reading comprehension

[mmc]

Just now, Lou said:

I never mentioned Eppler.  You might want to work on your reading comprehension

I know insulting people is your thing, but this is an Eppler thread.  It's obvious what your agenda here is.

[Lou]

1 minute ago, mymerlincat said:

I know insulting people is your thing, but this is an Eppler thread.  It's obvious what your agenda here is.

Wrong again

[Claude]

Just now, Vladdylonglegs said:

That’s just about what it will take to land Harvey, Allen, Cahill type reclamation projects. 

Yep and Arte isn’t going to touch that threshold which is about another $40M in his pocket. 

[Inside Pitch]

40 minutes ago, mymerlincat said:

It's cute seeing people like you using "well someone else did it too!" as an excuse for Eppler.  To answer your question, if he comes back strong (he will come back in a month or so which, along with ST, should give him time to shake off the dust of being injured) and helps the Padres push for (and possibly make) the playoffs, while being the vet to help the prospects adjust to the majors (and giving them depth so they aren't forced to throw them to the majors prematurely), then yes, I would say it's worth it. 

As cute as people such as yourself using hindsight to try to argue what was obvious?    BTW -- you used IF when discussing Richards..  The Angels believed that IF Cahill played to his projections that he would be more than worth the contract they signed.   They believed that IF Harvey's velocity continued to return he might see an uptick.  That's the thing about IFs...  they aren't sure things.   And FWIW, Im a big Richards believer so, I'm not betting against him.

You have on multiple occasions pointed to the 1 year contracts paid to Cahill, Harvey, and Allen as proof positive of Eppler's inability to judge talent and yet, Fangraphs, BBP, MILBTradeRumors, all had them each pegged for two year deals at an average of what they ended up signing a one year deal for.  They lost out on who they wanted and tried to work one year deals for guys that weren't their first choice...  ONE year deals.  It's not like the Angels could just sit around and wait people out, they had glaring holes in the rotation and the pool of players was evaporating.  In retrospect they would have been better off not signing anyone save for maybe Miley, but that also ignores the lingering Trout situation and nobody here has any clue how that may have impacted their thought process.

This doesn't apply to you, but in another example of genius someone else brought up Happ as an example of the moves the Yankees have done to address their needs.   Because you know, the Yankees are smart..

Happ signed for 3 years, 17 mil per year..  he's put up  5.24 ERA.   I mean that's a world better than what the Angels got out of Cahill or Harvey but it's worse than what the Angels got from ANY starter to make at least 10 starts in 2018.   Let that sink in...  He's been worse than any Angels SP last year save for Deck Macguire, Lotsofletters Despaigne, and John Lamb -- 17 mil a year.

The Yankees will be paying Happy 34 mil the next two years, the same amount as the Angels spent on their entire FA disaster this winter.   That's the net difference between paying more for one year and having it carry over and being "smart" like the Yankees and keeping a mistake around for three years.

 

Edited August 5, 2019 by Inside Pitch

[Inside Pitch]

19 minutes ago, Calzone 2 said:

That’s not a lot of money. 

Hey, that's enough to afford two Happs -- which you seem to think was a great move.  
 

[Claude]

6 minutes ago, Inside Pitch said:

Hey, that's enough to afford two Happs -- which you seem to think was a great move.  
 

2 Happs is better than none. 

[Inside Pitch]

2 minutes ago, Calzone 2 said:

2 Happs is better than none. 

I got nothing witty to respond to this with.   So "bad words".

Edited August 5, 2019 by Inside Pitch

[Claude]

1 minute ago, Inside Pitch said:

I got nothing witty to respond to this with.   So "bad words".

It’s all good IP. I get the gist of what you’re saying. All of these free agents are a crapshoot. Who could’ve imagined the great loss this team suffered. The human side kicks in and you just can’t help but feel bad for them. 

[mmc]

20 minutes ago, Inside Pitch said:

As cute as people such as yourself using hindsight to try to argue what was obvious?    BTW -- you used IF when discussing Richards..  The Angels believed that IF Cahill played to his projections that he would be more than worth the contract they signed.   They believed that IF Harvey's velocity continued to return he might see an uptick.  That's the thing about IFs...  they aren't sure things.   And FWIW, Im a big Richards believer so, I'm not betting against him.

You have on multiple occasions pointed to the 1 year contracts paid to Cahill, Harvey, and Allen as proof positive of Eppler's inability to judge talent and yet, Fangraphs, BBP, MILBTradeRumors, all had them each pegged for two year deals at an average of what they ended up signing a one year deal for.  They lost out on who they wanted and tried to work one year deals for guys that weren't their first choice...  ONE year deals.  It's not like the Angels could just sit around and wait people out, they had glaring holes in the rotation and the pool of players was evaporating.  In retrospect they would have been better off not signing anyone save for maybe Miley, but that also ignores the lingering Trout situation and nobody here has any clue how that may have impacted their thought process.

This doesn't apply to you, but in another example of genius someone else brought up Happ as an example of the moves the Yankees have done to address their needs.   Because you know, the Yankees are smart..

Happ signed for 3 years, 17 mil per year..  he's put up  5.24 ERA.   I mean that's a world better than what the Angels got out of Cahill or Harvey but it's worse than what the Angels got from ANY starter to make at least 10 starts in 2018.   Let that sink in...  He's been worse than any Angels SP last year save for Deck Macguire, Lotsofletters Despaigne, and John Lamb -- 17 mil a year.

The Yankees will be paying Happy 34 mil the next two years, the same amount as the Angels spent on their entire FA disaster this winter.   That's the net difference between paying more for one year and having it carry over and being "smart" like the Yankees and keeping a mistake around for three years.

 

I don't bloody well care what people projected him to earn, they misjudged the market as well.  But unlike an actual GM, their projections don't hurt anyone.  Everyone laughed at the Angels for those contracts the moment they were signed. 

 

And Happ's .9 fWAR would tie Canning to lead the team among starting pitchers...

[Inside Pitch]

8 minutes ago, Calzone 2 said:

It’s all good IP. I get the gist of what you’re saying. All of these free agents are a crapshoot. Who could’ve imagined the great loss this team suffered. The human side kicks in and you just can’t help but feel bad for them. 

I'm actually NOT saying that.   That WOULD be giving Eppler a free pass and I don't think he should get one.

I thought Harvey was going to be dumpster fire -- I even commented on how I doubted he would be able to get a deal earning as much as he had the previous year.   I also went on record saying the only RP I didn't want was Allen.   But there wasn't a single projection model that had any of the Angels FA pitching signings being as bad as they were.  So, that's why I'm firmly in the Eppler has to wear it camp and yet willing to see how he follows it up.  

But people talking about the one year deals while ignoring most people were projecting two year deals for all of them, and pretending the Trout situation didn't add a layer of urgency to solidifying the holes in the rotation is pretty maddening.   They all went tits up, but they were all one year deals, that both added to their upfront cost and makes it easier to swallow.
 

Edited August 5, 2019 by Inside Pitch

[Inside Pitch]

8 minutes ago, mymerlincat said:

I don't bloody well care what people projected him to earn, they misjudged the market as well.  But unlike an actual GM, their projections don't hurt anyone.  Everyone laughed at the Angels for those contracts the moment they were signed. 

 

And Happ's .9 fWAR would tie Canning to lead the team among starting pitchers...

So basically your entire argument is -- "scoreboard baby".   Fair enough.  

BTW -- Skaggs 1.8 fWAR says you're wrong about the only thing in your post that could be proven.

 

Edited August 5, 2019 by Inside Pitch

[Claude]

11 minutes ago, Inside Pitch said:

I'm actually NOT saying that.   That WOULD be giving Eppler a free pass and I don't think he should get one.

I thought Harvey was going to be dumpster fire -- I even commented on how I doubted he would be able to get a deal earning as much as he had the previous year.   I also went on record saying the only RP I didn't want was Allen.   But there wasn't a single projection model that had any of the Angels FA pitching signings being as bad as they were.  So, that's why I'm firmly in the Eppler has to wear it camp.   

But people talking about the one year deals while ignoring most people were projecting two year deals for all of them, and pretending the Trout situation didn't add a layer of urgency to solidifying the holes in the rotation is pretty maddening.   They all went tits up, but they were all one year deals, that both added to their upfront cost and makes it easier to swallow.
 

I also don’t think the market had too much to choose from at the time. There was also a collusion accusation. Not sure if it was true but all of the owners did lay low for about 18 months. 

Edited August 5, 2019 by Calzone 2

[Claude]

10 minutes ago, mymerlincat said:

I don't bloody well care what people projected him to earn, they misjudged the market as well.  But unlike an actual GM, their projections don't hurt anyone.  Everyone laughed at the Angels for those contracts the moment they were signed. 

 

And Happ's .9 fWAR would tie Canning to lead the team among starting pitchers...

Happ hasn’t been great but he’s posted 9 wins and pitched 115 innings. I don’t think we have anyone that’s close to that in either category. 

[Inside Pitch]

4 minutes ago, Calzone 2 said:

Happ hasn’t been great but he’s posted 9 wins and pitched 115 innings. I don’t think we have anyone that’s close to that in either category. 

He's got 9 wins for the same reason Rick Porcello does ... Run support.  Happ's been getting 5.45 runs of support in his starts.   His 5.24 ERA is the 5th worst in MLB among qualifiers.

http://www.espn.com/mlb/stats/pitching/_/count/41/qualified/true/order/false

115 innings would be a god send on the Angels but, not exactly quality innings from a guy making 17 mil this year and due another 34 mil the next two seasons.

[Claude]

1 minute ago, Inside Pitch said:

He's got 9 wins for the same reason Rick Porcello does ... Run support.  Happ's been getting 5.45 runs of support in his starts.   His 5.24 ERA is the 5th worst in MLB among qualifiers.

http://www.espn.com/mlb/stats/pitching/_/count/41/qualified/true/order/false

115 innings would be a god send on the Angels but, not exactly quality innings from a guy making 17 mil this year and due another 34 mil the next two seasons.

Definitely not quality work but we would be elated is both Harvey and Cahill each had 9 wins and 115 innings pitched at this point. 

[Angelsjunky]

19 minutes ago, Calzone 2 said:

Happ hasn’t been great but he’s posted 9 wins and pitched 115 innings. I don’t think we have anyone that’s close to that in either category. 

You realize that not even Cy Young voters look at pitcher wins as anything more than window-dressing. They are a non-stat, more indicative of run support and team offense than a pitcher's ability.

[Claude]

We can all play the blame game and theorize what happened or what could’ve been but the bottom line is that we’re not in it again and there’s nothing any of us can do about it. October approaches and it’s my favorite time of year to watch baseball. 

[eligrba]

38 minutes ago, mymerlincat said:

I don't bloody well care what people projected him to earn, they misjudged the market as well.  But unlike an actual GM, their projections don't hurt anyone.  Everyone laughed at the Angels for those contracts the moment they were signed. 

 

And Happ's .9 fWAR would tie Canning to lead the team among starting pitchers...

Link?

[Angelsjunky]

6 hours ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

Based on my conversations with Eppler, he is aware this is what he has to do. 

I have no doubt they will make a run at Cole and lots of other top starters. 

I doubt they’ll be able to afford 2 at the top, but maybe a top and middle, like Cole and Odorizzi. Or maybe the second is a trade.

OK, good to know - this is exactly my thinking as well. 

[Inside Pitch]

Just now, Calzone 2 said:

Definitely not quality work but we would be elated is both Harvey and Cahill each had 9 wins and 115 innings pitched at this point. 

Was actually surprised to see how poorly he's pitched, I had not really looked until you brought him up.   In fact, sort of surprising to see it but as a whole the Yankees rotation has been pretty mediocre.  The only starter with an above average ERA+ is Domingo German.

Tanaka -- 4.78 - 92
Happ -- 5.24 - 84
German -- 3.98 - 111
Paxton -- 4.61 - 96
Sabathia -- 4.78 - 92

Doesnt make me feel better about our shit show rotation but, surprising numbers given their record.

[Claude]

5 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

You realize that not even Cy Young voters look at pitcher wins as anything more than window-dressing. They are a non-stat, more indicative of run support and team offense than a pitcher's ability.

I do remember how happy people were when Weaver got his 20th win in 2012.

So meaningless?

[Angelsjunky]

4 minutes ago, Calzone 2 said:

We can all play the blame game and theorize what happened or what could’ve been but the bottom line is that we’re not in it again and there’s nothing any of us can do about it. October approaches and it’s my favorite time of year to watch baseball.