SoWhat

Angels discussed Clevinger with Indians

Recommended Posts

I think the best thing to take away here is simply that Eppler is discussing acquiring more starting pitching and he has his eyes set on upside.

This tells me he's at least aware of the needs of the team and doesn't believe the Angels are good right where they're at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Second Base said:

I think the best thing to take away here is simply that Eppler is discussing acquiring more starting pitching and he has his eyes set on upside.

This tells me he's at least aware of the needs of the team and doesn't believe the Angels are good right where they're at.

^this. He’s still working on finding a frontline arm.

Most teams will be asking for Adell still, and if not him, Marsh. Give it a few weeks. Might be able to still get someone solid for Rengifo, Suarez, plus. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ANY trade for a front line starter is going to require Adell. Either the Angels hang onto him or they aren't getting that type of starter. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Vegas Halo Fan said:

The farm was so horrible and so devoid of talent for such a long time that I understand this. You don't want to trade the future for the past.

There was a trailer on MLB Network this morning that implies that a Clevinger-to-Angels deal isn't dead.

As far as trading him for the immortal Vinnie Pestano and looking at what he has become, remember who the Angels' pitching coach was then. He might have come up and flamed out without amounting to anything.

I haven’t seen one rational person suggest a trade that could be categorized as trading the future for the past.
My comment was about people discussing trading good prospects for frontline pitching that is controllable into the future, and they are hesitant because they don’t want to end up with a thinner farm system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Jason said:

ANY trade for a front line starter is going to require Adell. Either the Angels hang onto him or they aren't getting that type of starter. 

Or they’re going to wait and hope their young guys develop into a Clevinger type or someone who can be traded for one. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jason said:

ANY trade for a front line starter is going to require Adell. Either the Angels hang onto him or they aren't getting that type of starter. 

Yes, or if they somehow manage to keep Adell then they are going to have to give up a quantity of the next best prospects (some combination of Marsh, Knowles, Adams, Regifro, etc) But that freaks people out as “gutting” the farm.

So we do this circular game where the alternative suggested is to go get some pedestrian #3 and keep most of the better prospects.

And you can do that.  But then the Angels probably still need a front line starter.  So what is the point of using trade pieces to not end up with what you actually need?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Pancake Bear said:

Or they’re going to wait and hope their young guys develop into a Clevinger type or someone who can be traded for one. 

That sounds more likely. Probably won't happen this season though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

Yes, or if they somehow manage to keep Adell then they are going to have to give up a quantity of the next best prospects (some combination of Marsh, Knowles, Adams, Regifro, etc) But that freaks people out as “gutting” the farm.

So we do this circular game where the alternative suggested is to go get some pedestrian #3 and keep most of the better prospects.

And you can do that.  But then the Angels probably still need a front line starter.  So what is the point of using trade pieces to not end up with what you actually need?

 

Exactly! Either trade Adell or do what @Pancake Bearis suggesting. Develop the next front line starter 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, I do expect there to be a trade, but given the asking price that @totdprods has referenced, I think this trade will looked he something in the arena of David Price. Someone that costs money, and not prospects, that eats innings but also has the potential to be an upside play.

And if it were David Price, you certainly wish there were more certainty, but at this stage of the off-season, with the lack of options left on the market, it's about the best you could hope for. If Billy didn't want to be in a spot where he's gambling, then he should've been more aggressive on some of the free agents. 

Price is a consolation. One that could really help the team if things break right. Or one that doesn't do much more than eat innings if it doesn't work out right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

I haven’t seen one rational person suggest a trade that could be categorized as trading the future for the past.
My comment was about people discussing trading good prospects for frontline pitching that is controllable into the future, and they are hesitant because they don’t want to end up with a thinner farm system.

The question I guess worth asking is. Would people rather have a top farm system or a WS contender? What means more? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Kevinb said:

The question I guess worth asking is. Would people rather have a top farm system or a WS contender? What means more? 

Well Adell is going to graduate this year, so I am not sure that is the right question.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Second Base said:

Again, I do expect there to be a trade, but given the asking price that @totdprods has referenced, I think this trade will looked he something in the arena of David Price. Someone that costs money, and not prospects, that eats innings but also has the potential to be an upside play.

And if it were David Price, you certainly wish there were more certainty, but at this stage of the off-season, with the lack of options left on the market, it's about the best you could hope for. If Billy didn't want to be in a spot where he's gambling, then he should've been more aggressive on some of the free agents. 

Price is a consolation. One that could really help the team if things break right. Or one that doesn't do much more than eat innings if it doesn't work out right.

I think it also depends how you define a #1. A lot of people will point to Sale for electric stuff, Scherzer or Cole for dominance, deGrom for consistency. 

I tend to think of a #1 as less of a measure of 'stuff' but more of an ability to go out there consistently and give you a chance to win. Maybe that's because the Angels recent #1s (Lackey, Weaver, Washburn) weren't really dominant, but at their peak were good for 30+ GS, 200+ IP, 3.00-3.50 ERA, which I'd see is a realistic goal for every team's #1. There aren't 30 Sales, Coles, Scherzer and deGroms. 

By fWar, the top 30 SP last year - a real quick way to measure the '#1s', in my mind, the list starts with Cole, deGrom and...Lance Lynn? 33 GS, 208 IP, 6.8 WAR, 3.67 ERA. 
Lynn is sitting there in third, above Scherzer, Cy Young winner Verlander, $240m Strasburg, Ryu, Wheeler, Syndergaard...

  • Lynn: 10.6 K/9, 2.6 BB/9, 0.9 HR/9, 40% GB%, 3.13 FIP, 3.85 xFIP, .322 BAbip (2019)
  • Price: 10.7 K/9, 2.7 BB/9, 1.2 HR/9, 41% GB%, 3.62 FIP, 3.73 xFIP, .336 BAbip (2019)
  • Price: 9.0 K/9, 2.3 BB/9, 1.2 HR/9, 41% GB%, 3.76 FIP, .3.89 xFIP, 294 BAbip ('16-'18)

Price allowed a few more HR and hits, and threw 100 less innings. 
Price didn't really buck any trends he's averaged with Boston, except a fairly significant increase in strikeouts. 

Health is of course the x-factor. Price is one year older. But if David Price was acquired and pitched inline with his 2019 numbers, his Boston numbers, the numbers that Lance Lynn posted last year and gave him third most SP WAR, then I could see him being defined as a "#1" by some measures.

Jose Quintana also made last year's top 30, as did Joe Musgrove, Marcus Stroman, Eduardo Rodriguez, and Marco Gonzales, any of whom could still be within trade reach this winter. Matt Boyd was #31. Jon Lester #37. Anthony DeSclafani #41, Robbie Ray #42.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Kevinb said:

The question I guess worth asking is. Would people rather have a top farm system or a WS contender? What means more? 

The answer to that should be obvious, BUT... im not sure its that simple at all.

The reality is that almost nothing we do right now will make us a WS favorite over the Yanks/Astros.  No front line ace we could get at any price puts us in that position.  In fact im not sure anyone even makes us a divisional favorite for 20. 

We have no reason to force the issue right now, we do not HAVE to have this for 20 as were going to need some luck to be anything but a wild card team this year and we should have many more, perhaps even better, options at the deadline than we have now.

If its a good fair balanced deal, fine, but thats not whats out there based on the rumors and overpaying right now would just be silly.  

@Stradlingmenioned the only deal that makes sense, and im not even sure if that was something he read or just a "for example" thing in the LaStella for Samardijia thing.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Kevinb said:

The question I guess worth asking is. Would people rather have a top farm system or a WS contender? What means more? 

That’s not hard to answer.

Would you rather own 1000 shares of Amazon right now worth about $2m or 2000 shares in an upstart that could be the next amazon?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jason said:

That sounds more likely. Probably won't happen this season though

Yeah, that approach would require patience and a bit of luck. That’s a risk also, though. We don’t have the luxury of too much time. Trout and Rendon won’t be getting much better. Decline will be coming sooner than we want to admit. Hopefully not too quickly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

That’s not hard to answer.

Would you rather own 1000 shares of Amazon right now worth about $2m or 2000 shares in an upstart that could be the next amazon?

I’ll take the 1000 shares that’s worth 2 million dollars rather than bet my money on penny stocks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, totdprods said:

I think it also depends how you define a #1. A lot of people will point to Sale for electric stuff, Scherzer or Cole for dominance, deGrom for consistency. 

I tend to think of a #1 as less of a measure of 'stuff' but more of an ability to go out there consistently and give you a chance to win. Maybe that's because the Angels recent #1s (Lackey, Weaver, Washburn) weren't really dominant, but at their peak were good for 30+ GS, 200+ IP, 3.00-3.50 ERA, which I'd see is a realistic goal for every team's #1. There aren't 30 Sales, Coles, Scherzer and deGroms. 

By fWar, the top 30 SP last year - a real quick way to measure the '#1s', in my mind, the list starts with Cole, deGrom and...Lance Lynn? 33 GS, 208 IP, 6.8 WAR, 3.67 ERA. 
Lynn is sitting there in third, above Scherzer, Cy Young winner Verlander, $240m Strasburg, Ryu, Wheeler, Syndergaard...

  • Lynn: 10.6 K/9, 2.6 BB/9, 0.9 HR/9, 40% GB%, 3.13 FIP, 3.85 xFIP, .322 BAbip (2019)
  • Price: 10.7 K/9, 2.7 BB/9, 1.2 HR/9, 41% GB%, 3.62 FIP, 3.73 xFIP, .336 BAbip (2019)
  • Price: 9.0 K/9, 2.3 BB/9, 1.2 HR/9, 41% GB%, 3.76 FIP, .3.89 xFIP, 294 BAbip ('16-'18)

Price allowed a few more HR and hits, and threw 100 less innings. 
Price didn't really buck any trends he's averaged with Boston, except a fairly significant increase in strikeouts. 

Health is of course the x-factor. Price is one year older. But if David Price was acquired and pitched inline with his 2019 numbers, his Boston numbers, the numbers that Lance Lynn posted last year and gave him third most SP WAR, then I could see him being defined as a "#1" by some measures.

Jose Quintana also made last year's top 30, as did Joe Musgrove, Marcus Stroman, Eduardo Rodriguez, and Marco Gonzales, any of whom could still be within trade reach this winter. Matt Boyd was #31. Jon Lester #37. Anthony DeSclafani #41, Robbie Ray #42.

Another example of why I am as skeptical as I am about WAR as it relates to pitching.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Second Base said:

Another example of why I am as skeptical as I am about WAR as it relates to pitching.

fWAR for pitching bases it too much on “what should have happened” rather than what did. I’m not crazy about that approach. 

For hitting, I’ll use WAR and wRC+ in analyzing players. Pitchers...it’s tougher, at least IMO. But I’m not exactly an analyst. I can look at numbers, but I’m no scout. I couldn’t begin to give you an explanation of how legit a given player’s numbers are or what their chances are of improvement or otherwise. 

I usually look at ERA, FIP, and K%/K-BB% for pitchers. I don’t take WAR numbers for pitchers as seriously as I do for position players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.