Angels showing interest in Max Scherzer

[ten ocho recon scout]

Just to make everyone feel better. Grienke to us in 12 was a better move for us than Max would have been. And that worked out like shit.

Im bummed the dodgers just got better, but not that we missed out on him.

[ten ocho recon scout]

2 minutes ago, cals said:

It must be weird to have a nose like that. 

Wouldnt have to buttercup yourself, thats for sure

[REDneck]

This is a big league get!!

Wish the Halos rolled like this

[Docwaukee]

1 minute ago, ten ocho recon scout said:

Just to make everyone feel better. Grienke to us in 12 was a better move for us than Max would have been. And that worked out like shit.

Im bummed the dodgers just got better, but not that we missed out on him.

max to us with an extension (gross) would have been more like the Haren trade.  

[ten ocho recon scout]

29 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

max to us with an extension (gross) would have been more like the Haren trade.  

With the extension (gross) yes. 

But my main point being, the 2012 was much more complete than our current one. And the lack of a farm after 12 has killed us.

This wouldnt have been smart at all on our end. Fun as hell, and we'd have a phenom 1-2 punch w him and shohei. But cishek would still be our 8th inning guy.

And as great as scherzer is, I dont know that we can afford him, if we want to keep Ohtani....

[Docwaukee]

7 minutes ago, ten ocho recon scout said:

With the extension (gross) yes. 

But my main point being, the 2012 was much more complete than our current one. And the lack of a farm after 12 has killed us.

This wouldnt have been smart at all on our end. Fun as hell, and we'd have a phenom 1-2 punch w him and shohei. But cishek would still be our 8th inning guy.

And as great as scherzer is, I dont know that we can afford him, if we want to keep Ohtani....

oh I agree.  I thought they were both a bit ill conceived.  For me, Haren was even worse because it was essentially for the next year(s) and provided no help for the current.  Plus the team still had plenty of other holes.  So giving up a huge chunk of your farm when it makes you an 85 win team instead of an 82 win team just hasn't ever made sense to me.  

[AngelsFaninGA]

If we actually traded for Scherzer his arm would immediately implode with such force that it creates a black hole that absorbs all of our players. Except Bundy, he defies physics and then gives up 6 runs the next day. 

[CanadianHalo]

I think the Dodgers saved us with this one but now we need to hope we don’t see a Rendon-like move and pivot to a lesser pitcher or even worse a positional player and overpay because Arte is horny for a splash now 

[Revad]

4 minutes ago, CanadianHalo said:

I think the Dodgers saved us with this one but now we need to hope we don’t see a Rendon-like move and pivot to a lesser pitcher or even worse a positional player and overpay because Arte is horny for a splash now 

Chances of Arte being hot to make a move definitely increased after the Dodgers did their thing.

[beatlesrule]

2 minutes ago, Revad said:

Chances of Arte being hot to make a move definitely increased after the Dodgers did their thing.

[eligrba]

Wonder what the Dodgers payroll looks like with Max?

[Revad]

2 minutes ago, eligrba said:

Wonder what the Dodgers payroll looks like with Max?

Let’s show Arte that payroll and say this is what it takes to win consistently.

[eligrba4ever]

The most inexpensive and least committal words in baseball: "We're in on (pick your player)."

[Stradling]

14 minutes ago, eligrba said:

Wonder what the Dodgers payroll looks like with Max?

$275 million

[rafibomb]

 

 

[jsnpritchett]

3 minutes ago, rafibomb said:

 

 

I'd love this to be true, but I'm not going to get my hopes up.  I'd assume the absolute floor for a deal would be something like 2 yrs/$60M, with the real number likely much higher, given that he hasn't really shown any signs of decline.  Then we're right back to 4 players making ~$135M, which likely means no big spending on bullpen upgrades, C, or SS.

[Dtwncbad]

I am just noting that there are people wanting to Re-sign Cobb because even though he is not an ace starter, he be that gutty veteran leader for next year.

Is there any sane fan that believes it wouldn’t be better to sign Scherzer because he can be that leader and be a beast?

[mmc]

Sounds more like Heyman speculating than actually hearing we're going to pursue him in free agency.  Plus unless we completely blow everyone else out of the water with an offer (which I would not do for someone his age), I don't see how he doesn't end his career on a contender.

[rafibomb]

6 minutes ago, jsnpritchett said:

I'd love this to be true, but I'm not going to get my hopes up.  I'd assume the absolute floor for a deal would be something like 2 yrs/$60M, with the real number likely much higher, given that he hasn't really shown any signs of decline.  Then we're right back to 4 players making ~$135M, which likely means no big spending on bullpen upgrades, C, or SS.

We need a "Holy Hell, Max Scherzer" thread!

But in all seriousness, if the young pitching continues to develop and succeed through the end of the season that really opens up what and how much we can spend on certain players. As of right now, there is no need for those 1 year stop-gap failures we have been accustomed to the last few years. I can only hope we can get more bullpen auditions before the end of the season to see if we can save some money on that front as well. Not that I would spend all that saved money if everything works out on Max, just talking in general whether it be spending on different pieces or a big name free agent.

Edited August 12, 2021 by rafibomb

[mmc]

Just now, Dtwncbad said:

I am just noting that there are people wanting to Re-sign Cobb because even though he is not an ace starter, he be that gutty veteran leader for next year.

Is there any sane fan that believes it wouldn’t be better to sign Scherzer because he can be that leader and be a beast?

Would you prefer Scherzer for near 30 million and no money to improve the pen or Cobb for around 10, give or take, and a much improved bullpen?

[Dtwncbad]

11 minutes ago, mmc said:

Would you prefer Scherzer for near 30 million and no money to improve the pen or Cobb for around 10, give or take, and a much improved bullpen?

The Angels are not bringing in $20m a year worth of bullpen help, so the question is flawed.

[Stradling]

1 minute ago, Dtwncbad said:

The Angels are not bringing in $20m a year worth of bullpen help, so the question is flawed.

Give an actual answer. 

[Dtwncbad]

4 minutes ago, Hells Rainbow said:

Give an actual answer. 

I thought I did but let me be more clear.

I would rather have the Angels spend $30m on Scherzer next year than spend $30 on a combination of Cobb and bullpen help where 2/3 of that $30m goes to the pen.

It is pretty damn hard to hack together a rotation that has a strong front half of the rotation.

It is possible to put together a great bullpen without breaking the bank.

If you have money to spend, secure the more difficult pieces with your financial resources.  At least you then have a chance.

We have seen how patching together a rotation has worked over the last few years.  It doesn’t.

[failos]

45 minutes ago, rafibomb said:

 

 

Lol Heyman is at it again

[Blarg]

38 minutes ago, rafibomb said:

 

 

Ok, one last time.

Scherzer's agent is Scott Boras which means Jon Heyman is Scherzer's agent as well. Every time Boras starts a bidding war he throws the Angels out there as an interested party regardless if they are or not and Heyman is his direct line for spreading rumors.

I would not trust anything out of Heyman's Twitter posts regarding any of the Boras clients. 

So go ahead and chase this rumor and invest lots of wasted time on this but it is almost a sure bet the Angels do not invest in a 37 year old pitcher looking for his retirement portfolio contract.