Angels WAR Report

[WicketMaiden]

We all know Shohei has been dominating the WAR charts this season, but how did everyone else do? I won’t list them all as the Angels used a ridiculous amount of players last year, so here are most of the notables:

Ohtani:  9.0 bWAR; 8.1 fWAR

Walsh:  2.9 and 2.8

Raisel:  2.8 and 2.0

Sandoval: 2.2 and 1.5

Fletcher: 1.9 and 0.3

Suarez:  1.9 and 1.3

Stassi:   1.8 and 2.9

Trout:    1.8 and 2.3

Cobb:    1.7 and 2.5

Mayers: 1.5 and 0.7

Cishek: 1.2 and 0.9

Warren: 0.9 and 0.7

Barria:   0.9 and 0.5

Ward:    0.6 and 0.5

Marsh:  0.2 and 1.0

Watson: 0.1 and 0.0

Gosselin: (-0.3) and 0.1

Lagares: (-0.3) and (-0.3)

Guerra: (-0.4) and 0.0

Suzuki:  (-0.4) and (-0.4)

Rengifo: (-0.5) and (-0.4)

Quintana (-1.0) and 0.0

Iglesias: (-1.0) and 0.4

Really nice numbers by Suarez and Sandoval from a combined 28 starts plus relief work, and Warren and Ward deserve a mention too. Promising signs for next year.

 

EDIT: In his short time with the Angels (24 games) Pujols 'contributed' (-0.7) bWAR and (-0.5) fWAR. 

[tdawg87]

That's absolutely nuts for Raisel. All the more reason to re-sign him.

[WicketMaiden]

1 hour ago, tdawg87 said:

That's absolutely nuts for Raisel. All the more reason to re-sign him.

Definitely this. With the cost of a win from a free agency signing purported to be $8.6m over the last three years, a contract around $14m/$16m AAV looks about right to build in a little room for regression. I didn't think he was worth a QO but if he gives the same next year he'll be worth it, in this respect at least. 

It was bloody nice to have a proper closer again wasn't it? 

[BTH]

The Angels really need to improve their position player depth.

You can't be rostering guys with negative WAR. Even replacement level isn't good.

If they could at least get more 0.5-1.5 WAR players to fill bench/depth roles, that would be beneficial. Even like a Freddy Galvis type in free agency adds 3-4 times as much value as Gosselin, Rojas, or Mayfield.

[totdprods]

10 minutes ago, Trendon said:

The Angels really need to improve their position player depth.

You can't be rostering guys with negative WAR. Even replacement level isn't good.

If they could at least get more 0.5-1.5 WAR players to fill bench/depth roles, that would be beneficial. Even like a Freddy Galvis type in free agency adds 3-4 times as much value as Gosselin, Rojas, or Mayfield.

Every single team is going to have several negative WAR pitchers and position players. The Rays had more negative WAR pitchers than the Angels. 

The real problem I see, if using WAR to assess this team's needs, isn't so much the bottom of that chart, but the gap between Walsh and Ohtani, where guys like Bundy, Quintana, Heaney, Rendon, and Trout should have been at or eclipsed.

That hurt us more than the neg WAR guys, with the exception of Iglesias, Quintana, and where ever Bundy is.

[TheLordofOuts]

Kind of depressing to see quite a few below replacement level players on the roster. 

[PattyD22]

Good lord Kurt Suzuki was bad.  I knew he was not good, but that's downright awful.

Edited October 6, 2021 by PattyD22

[Jason]

A lot of mediocrity on the 2021 roster 

[totdprods]

To me, this looks a little better in years past, as I don't see as many bad, or at least really bad players. 
There just aren't enough good players. Almost everyone is right around replacement level, give or take a WAR/negative WAR.

[Angelsjunky]

2 hours ago, WicketMaiden said:

Definitely this. With the cost of a win from a free agency signing purported to be $8.6m over the last three years, a contract around $14m/$16m AAV looks about right to build in a little room for regression. I didn't think he was worth a QO but if he gives the same next year he'll be worth it, in this respect at least. 

It was bloody nice to have a proper closer again wasn't it? 

I agree, although I think that whole WAR salary thing is overdone, and really doesn't apply to closers and high leverage relievers in general. You can't accurately measure by WAR the value of a lights-out reliever ending a rally.

I've gone on record that they should offer him the QO because:

1. He probably won't accept it.

2. If he does, worst-case scenario and the Angels overpay him by $4-5M for one year ($18.9M vs the $14-15M+ he'll likely cost).

3. If he doesn't, and doesn't resign with the Angels, they get a compensation pick (if the draft works the same next year).

[tchula]

3 hours ago, Angelsjunky said:

I agree, although I think that whole WAR salary thing is overdone, and really doesn't apply to closers and high leverage relievers in general. You can't accurately measure by WAR the value of a lights-out reliever ending a rally.

I've gone on record that they should offer him the QO because:

1. He probably won't accept it.

2. If he does, worst-case scenario and the Angels overpay him by $4-5M for one year ($18.9M vs the $14-15M+ he'll likely cost).

3. If he doesn't, and doesn't resign with the Angels, they get a compensation pick (if the draft works the same next year).

Honestly, I am undecided if we should offer Raisel Iglesias a qualify offer.  But, I admit, your reasoning is pretty damn strong.  On the one hand everything you say is true, but on the other that would eat into what will be likely half our free agent payroll and we still have to sign at least two pitchers and a short stop if we want to compete next year in my opinion, especially with all the injuries we've had this year.   But your right.  I bet he rejects the QO because he'll be looking for a long term deal.  Someone is sure to sign him (if not us), and at the minimum we'll get another 2nd round pick.  It would be nice to really start improving our minor league selections in rounds 3-10.  

[Angelsjunky]

59 minutes ago, tchula said:

Honestly, I am undecided if we should offer Raisel Iglesias a qualify offer.  But, I admit, your reasoning is pretty damn strong.  On the one hand everything you say is true, but on the other that would eat into what will be likely half our free agent payroll and we still have to sign at least two pitchers and a short stop if we want to compete next year in my opinion, especially with all the injuries we've had this year.   But your right.  I bet he rejects the QO because he'll be looking for a long term deal.  Someone is sure to sign him (if not us), and at the minimum we'll get another 2nd round pick.  It would be nice to really start improving our minor league selections in rounds 3-10.  

Yep. Look at it from Raisel's perspective: He accepts a QO and he's guaranteed $18.9M, but risks an off year or injury, and getting a much lower contract in 2023. If he refuses it, he's almost guaranteed more than twice that over three years, and possibly more.

The most comparable recent free agent to Raisel is Liam Hendriks, who was the best reliever in last year's market and received a 3/$54M contract. Like Raisel, Hendricks was entering his age 32 season.. But Hendriks was better; compare their numbers leading up to free agency:

Hendriks (2019-20): 110.1 IP, 13.13 K/9, 1.96 BB/9, 39 saves, 1.79 ERA, 1.70 FIP, 5.3 WAR

R Iglesias (2020-21): 93 IP, 12.97 K/9, 1.65 BB/9, 42 saves, 2.61 ERA, 2.58 FIP, 3.1 WAR

Hendriks has been, by a good margin, the best reliever in the game for three years now (2019-21), while Raisel is fifth best, according to WAR. But during that time, Hendriks has produced 7.9 WAR in 179.1 IP, while Raisel 4.3 in 160 IP. In other words, Raisel is an elite closer, but Hendriks as been historically great. His 2019 season (3.8 WAR) is one of the best in major league history, and the best closer season since Eric Gagne in 2003, which at 4.7 WAR in 82.1 IP is the best reliever season in baseball history under 100 IP (the best was Bruce Sutter in 1977, who produced 5.2 WAR in 107.1 IP). 

Anyhow, I think Hendriks' contract represents the upper limit of what Raisel might get - and he's likely to get less. It is a weird contract, including the typical $1M signing bonus and then an option for 2024 at $15M with a $15M buyout, payed out over 10 years. Meaning, Hendriks is "only" paid $38M over the first three years, but the White Sox are on the hook for either $15M for 2024 or that same amount over ten years. Hard to imagine a situation where they didn't keep him, so the contract is really 4/$54M, or $13.5M a year.

Other recent elite closer contracts include:

Hendricks (2021-24): 4/$54M

Kimbrel (2019-21): 3/$43M

Jansen (2017-21): 5/$80M (but Jansen was 29 when he got this contract)

Chapman (2020-22): 3/$48M

Jansen got that big contract at age 29, so it isn't really comparable. He's also a free agent, so that might ameliorate any "rush on Raisel" that might occur. My guess is that he receives something like 3/$42M, or anywhere between 3/$39M and 3/$48M.

[Erstad Grit]

Just saying:

After we signed Quintana I stated Teheran would have a higher WAR than Quintana. 

[Docwaukee]

Team rankings

Overall Offense  - 13.1 WAR (23rd in mlb).  2.5 WAR in the second half (dead last in mlb).  Defense is included in this.  Went from ranked 12th in the first half.  

Overall Pitching - 15.4 WAR (13th).  Starters 10.7 WAR (16th).  Relievers 4.7 WAR (8th).  Of which Iglesias was 2 WAR.  Warren had 0.7 WAR in 20.1 innings.  Quijada had 0.5 WAR in 25.2 innings.  Herget had 0.4 WAR in 14.2 innings.  Ranked 4th in the second half with 3.6 WAR.  

Some other stats.  

a 0.66 differential between ERA and FIP.  

DEF of -32.2 which was third to last.  -23 DRS.  

C - 1.7 WAR (19th)
1b - 2.1 WAR (15th)
2b - 0.5 WAR (28th)
SS - 1.0 WAR (24th)
3b - 1.0 WAR (20th)
RF - -0.3 WAR (28th)
CF - 3.2 WAR (12th)  Trout had 2.3 of that in 39 games. 
LF - -0.4 WAR (27th)
DH - 4.7 WAR (1st)

So the combined OF was 2.4 WAR.  ie outside of Trout's 39 games it was effectively replacement level. 

Oh and Fletch with his 0.3 in 665 PA is the 8th worst in all of baseball.   That's beyond miserable.  I like the guy.  I really do, but you can't go into 2022 without a contingency plan to replace him.  He had a -0.9 WAR in the second half.  I don't care how good his defense is, that's just unacceptable.  He's probably earned the right to bounce back but that's a problem.  Or at least a huge and fairly easy opportunity to improve.  

While I definitely agree that we have to improve the pitching a bit, it's not as much as you'd think and while a big chunk of that poor offense came from missing Trout and Rendon, wins are wins and they need to consider improving any possible way they can.  There will be a much better chance of adding a bunch of runs on top of Trout and Rendon coming back then preventing them by who they add on the mound.  The huge chunk of prevention need to also come from the lineup.  ie Defense.  In other words, there is as much if not more bang for buck on the position player side that needs to be addressed than the PTSD related pitching thing.    

The good news is that 4 or 5 really good players could make this team really good.  That's not bad for a  team that won 77 games.  And the other good news is that the other 20 or so guys are actually locked up for 2-3 years.  And even more good news is that a couple of those 5 we need are pen guys which tends to be a bit easier and cheaper to find. 

The bad news is cost.  Whether money or prospects, it'll be a pretty penny in some way to get those 5 players.    

[totdprods]

8 hours ago, Erstad Grit said:

Just saying:

After we signed Quintana I stated Teheran would have a higher WAR than Quintana. 

It is mind-blowing how bad those two wound up being. I expected 4.50 ERA, 160 IP...nowhere close.

[WicketMaiden]

@Angelsjunky @Dochalo Hi guys, are you quoting fWAR or bWAR? Thanks.

[Jeff Fletcher]

10 hours ago, Angelsjunky said:

Hendriks (2019-20): 110.1 IP, 13.13 K/9, 1.96 BB/9, 39 saves, 1.79 ERA, 1.70 FIP, 5.3 WAR

R Iglesias (2020-21): 93 IP, 12.97 K/9, 1.65 BB/9, 42 saves, 2.61 ERA, 2.58 FIP, 3.1 WAR

If you compare them over the 3-5 seasons leading into free agency, Iglesias looks a lot better. Hendriks basically came out of nowhere to be good. Iglesias has pretty much always been good. 
 

Add the fact that last year no one knew what revenue would look like for 2021 and this year they do (or better) and I would not be surprised if Iglesias gets what Hendriks got (or more).

I’d give him a QO.

I know you all want the Angels to sign two SPs in the 15-20M range but that seems like a stretch, so I am not sure they are losing out on anyone if they overpay for Iglesias. 

[arch stanton]

28 minutes ago, WicketMaiden said:

@Angelsjunky @Dochalo Hi guys, are you quoting fWAR or bWAR? Thanks.

These 2 will never be quoting bWAR

[AngelsLakersFan]

8 hours ago, Dochalo said:

Team rankings

Overall Offense  - 13.1 WAR (23rd in mlb).  2.5 WAR in the second half (dead last in mlb).  Defense is included in this.  Went from ranked 12th in the first half.  

Overall Pitching - 15.4 WAR (13th).  Starters 10.7 WAR (16th).  Relievers 4.7 WAR (8th).  Of which Iglesias was 2 WAR.  Warren had 0.7 WAR in 20.1 innings.  Quijada had 0.5 WAR in 25.2 innings.  Herget had 0.4 WAR in 14.2 innings.  Ranked 4th in the second half with 3.6 WAR.  

Some other stats.  

a 0.66 differential between ERA and FIP.  

DEF of -32.2 which was third to last.  -23 DRS.  

C - 1.7 WAR (19th)
1b - 2.1 WAR (15th)
2b - 0.5 WAR (28th)
SS - 1.0 WAR (24th)
3b - 1.0 WAR (20th)
RF - -0.3 WAR (28th)
CF - 3.2 WAR (12th)  Trout had 2.3 of that in 39 games. 
LF - -0.4 WAR (27th)
DH - 4.7 WAR (1st)

So the combined OF was 2.4 WAR.  ie outside of Trout's 39 games it was effectively replacement level. 

Oh and Fletch with his 0.3 in 665 PA is the 8th worst in all of baseball.   That's beyond miserable.  I like the guy.  I really do, but you can't go into 2022 without a contingency plan to replace him.  He had a -0.9 WAR in the second half.  I don't care how good his defense is, that's just unacceptable.  He's probably earned the right to bounce back but that's a problem.  Or at least a huge and fairly easy opportunity to improve.  

While I definitely agree that we have to improve the pitching a bit, it's not as much as you'd think and while a big chunk of that poor offense came from missing Trout and Rendon, wins are wins and they need to consider improving any possible way they can.  There will be a much better chance of adding a bunch of runs on top of Trout and Rendon coming back then preventing them by who they add on the mound.  The huge chunk of prevention need to also come from the lineup.  ie Defense.  In other words, there is as much if not more bang for buck on the position player side that needs to be addressed than the PTSD related pitching thing.    

The good news is that 4 or 5 really good players could make this team really good.  That's not bad for a  team that won 77 games.  And the other good news is that the other 20 or so guys are actually locked up for 2-3 years.  And even more good news is that a couple of those 5 we need are pen guys which tends to be a bit easier and cheaper to find. 

The bad news is cost.  Whether money or prospects, it'll be a pretty penny in some way to get those 5 players.    

I know it's not a popular opinion on here, but this lays out pretty well the reasons why I think the team needs to bring in a good shortstop. Ignoring who they sign on the mound this team doesn't win with 0 war up the middle.

[AngelsLakersFan]

50 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

If you compare them over the 3-5 seasons leading into free agency, Iglesias looks a lot better. Hendriks basically came out of nowhere to be good. Iglesias has pretty much always been good. 
 

Add the fact that last year no one knew what revenue would look like for 2021 and this year they do (or better) and I would not be surprised if Iglesias gets what Hendriks got (or more).

I’d give him a QO.

I know you all want the Angels to sign two SPs in the 15-20M range but that seems like a stretch, so I am not sure they are losing out on anyone if they overpay for Iglesias. 

If the team is serious about re-signing Iglesias they should give him a QO. I'm not sure he accepts it, which will depress his market and make bringing him back more feasible. If he does accept it it's a mild single year over pay that avoids the long term risk of a longer contract.

[Angelsjunky]

55 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

If you compare them over the 3-5 seasons leading into free agency, Iglesias looks a lot better. Hendriks basically came out of nowhere to be good. Iglesias has pretty much always been good. 
 

Add the fact that last year no one knew what revenue would look like for 2021 and this year they do (or better) and I would not be surprised if Iglesias gets what Hendriks got (or more).

I’d give him a QO.

I know you all want the Angels to sign two SPs in the 15-20M range but that seems like a stretch, so I am not sure they are losing out on anyone if they overpay for Iglesias. 

Yes, agreed (which is also why I said Iglesias has a longer track record as a premier closer).

That said, Hendriks has been killing it for three seasons, so I think had established a higher level of value than Iglesias has now. But as you say, free agent contracts fluctuate, and we've seen before how a number one might get, say, $25M a year one year, and the next a #2 gets a similar amount. I still don't think Raisel gets more than 3/$48M, at least as the guaranteed contract.

[Angelsjunky]

1 hour ago, WicketMaiden said:

@Angelsjunky @Dochalo Hi guys, are you quoting fWAR or bWAR? Thanks.

I generally use fWAR. I don't love either for pitchers, though, but prefer fWAR for hitters and maybe slightly more for pitchers as it doesn't have the huge outliers that bWAR does (e.g. Aaron Nola's 10.2 in 2018).

[AngelsLakersFan]

5 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

I generally use fWAR. I don't love either for pitchers, though, but prefer fWAR for hitters and maybe slightly more for pitchers as it doesn't have the huge outliers that bWAR does (e.g. Aaron Nola's 10.2 in 2018).

I'm pretty sure bWar is trash.

[Angelsjunky]

9 hours ago, Dochalo said:

Team rankings

Overall Offense  - 13.1 WAR (23rd in mlb).  2.5 WAR in the second half (dead last in mlb).  Defense is included in this.  Went from ranked 12th in the first half.  

A lot of that is Ohtani's second half slump - he had such a huge impact and was carrying the team through July.

9 hours ago, Dochalo said:

Overall Pitching - 15.4 WAR (13th).  Starters 10.7 WAR (16th).  Relievers 4.7 WAR (8th).  Of which Iglesias was 2 WAR.  Warren had 0.7 WAR in 20.1 innings.  Quijada had 0.5 WAR in 25.2 innings.  Herget had 0.4 WAR in 14.2 innings.  Ranked 4th in the second half with 3.6 WAR.  

Some other stats.  

a 0.66 differential between ERA and FIP.  

DEF of -32.2 which was third to last.  -23 DRS.  

C - 1.7 WAR (19th)
1b - 2.1 WAR (15th)
2b - 0.5 WAR (28th)
SS - 1.0 WAR (24th)
3b - 1.0 WAR (20th)
RF - -0.3 WAR (28th)
CF - 3.2 WAR (12th)  Trout had 2.3 of that in 39 games. 
LF - -0.4 WAR (27th)
DH - 4.7 WAR (1st)

So the combined OF was 2.4 WAR.  ie outside of Trout's 39 games it was effectively replacement level. 

Oh and Fletch with his 0.3 in 665 PA is the 8th worst in all of baseball.   That's beyond miserable.  I like the guy.  I really do, but you can't go into 2022 without a contingency plan to replace him.  He had a -0.9 WAR in the second half.  I don't care how good his defense is, that's just unacceptable.  He's probably earned the right to bounce back but that's a problem.  Or at least a huge and fairly easy opportunity to improve.  

I agree, but just don't think it likely that the Angels bench him in 2022, except for maybe a few games to reset. He's going to be given a lot of time to figure it out. Hopefully he starts well and it isn't a problem. But this chart does illustrate something that isn't really talked about: that while the Angels could float a mediocre SS, that's more problematic if Fletcher sucks again. So going with Rengifo/Mayfield/Davis is OK if we get Fletcher Classic back, it isn't so great if we get the 2021 version again.

As for the rest of the lineup, I think the OF will naturally improve with Trout back and Marsh and Adell becoming more seasoned. I really wouldn't be surprised to see Marsh jump up to .270/.340/.420 which, with his defense, makes him a 3+ WAR player. Adell should hit at least .250/.300/.450. And obviously both have more upside beyond that.

Replacing Suzuki with either a good defensive catcher as backup to Stassi or Thaiss, who should be what the Angels hoped Suzuki would be (solid bat, passing defense), should go a long way. Stassi slumped really bad towards the end of the year, but still was quite solid. And of course Rendon will greatly improve 3B.

9 hours ago, Dochalo said:

While I definitely agree that we have to improve the pitching a bit, it's not as much as you'd think and while a big chunk of that poor offense came from missing Trout and Rendon, wins are wins and they need to consider improving any possible way they can.  There will be a much better chance of adding a bunch of runs on top of Trout and Rendon coming back then preventing them by who they add on the mound.  The huge chunk of prevention need to also come from the lineup.  ie Defense.  In other words, there is as much if not more bang for buck on the position player side that needs to be addressed than the PTSD related pitching thing.    

The good news is that 4 or 5 really good players could make this team really good.  That's not bad for a  team that won 77 games.  And the other good news is that the other 20 or so guys are actually locked up for 2-3 years.  And even more good news is that a couple of those 5 we need are pen guys which tends to be a bit easier and cheaper to find. 

The bad news is cost.  Whether money or prospects, it'll be a pretty penny in some way to get those 5 players.    

Yeah, there's no way they sign 5 good players, but they could sign 3, and trade for another 1 or 2.

I'm still on: One very good starter, one good starter (e.g. Cobb), one closer, a back-up catcher, and maybe a veteran middle infielder.

That said, I wouldn't be surprised if Arte pushes Minasian to go all-in on Correa or (gulp) Baez. As much as I don't like Baez's OBP, he does play good defense. He's just not worth the $25M he's going to cost, and when he declines and/or slumps, it is going to be ugly.

[AngelsLakersFan]

6 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

That said, I wouldn't be surprised if Arte pushes Minasian to go all-in on Correa or (gulp) Baez. As much as I don't like Baez's OBP, he does play good defense. He's just not worth the $25M he's going to cost, and when he declines and/or slumps, it is going to be ugly.

Value is value. If Baez can be gotten for a reasonable price there is no reason to avoid him.