Is Re-Signing Raisel Iglesias the Smart Move?

[BTH]

To begin, Raisel Iglesias was simply outstanding in 2021. It was a joy to watch him close out games, relatively stress free. He had some insanely dominant outings.

That being said, I pose the question: Is re-signing Raisel Iglesias the smart move?

For starters, he's likely going to command a 3-4 year deal with an AAV from $14-$20M. If he performs like he did last season, he's worth the money. But there's no guarantee that he does that. If he slips off, is he worth the large contract he deserves and will get? Then, you factor in that the Angels only have so much money to spend. Is utilizing a third or almost half the budget on a closer the proper move?

[DMVol]

Pay the man….he doesn’t show any signs of slowing down…

[bruin5]

1 hour ago, Trendon said:

To begin, Raisel Iglesias was simply outstanding in 2021. It was a joy to watch him close out games, relatively stress free. He had some insanely dominant outings.

That being said, I pose the question: Is re-signing Raisel Iglesias the smart move?

For starters, he's likely going to command a 3-4 year deal with an AAV from $14-$20M. If he performs like he did last season, he's worth the money. But there's no guarantee that he does that. If he slips off, is he worth the large contract he deserves and will get? Then, you factor in that the Angels only have so much money to spend. Is utilizing a third or almost half the budget on a closer the proper move?

Didn’t he make $9M last year?  So isn’t it really a $5 or $6M additional per year? Maybe I’m not thinking about it correctly.  

[WicketMaiden]

1 hour ago, Trendon said:

For starters, he's likely going to command a 3-4 year deal with an AAV from $14-$20M. If he performs like he did last season, he's worth the money. But there's no guarantee that he does that. If he slips off, is he worth the large contract he deserves and will get? Then, you factor in that the Angels only have so much money to spend. Is utilizing a third or almost half the budget on a closer the proper move?

Trying to sign him is a no-brainer. How smart it is depends on where in this salary range he falls: 3/$42m looks a whole lot smarter than 4/$80m. 

[mmc]

It’s not my money

[PattyD22]

Absolutely.  No question.  The Angels haven’t had a lock down closer in a few years.  He can be that guy.  
 

“Pay dat man his money” —Rounders

Edited October 22, 2021 by PattyD22

[BTH]

26 minutes ago, bruin5 said:

Didn’t he make $9M last year?  So isn’t it really a $5 or $6M additional per year? Maybe I’m not thinking about it correctly.  

The Reds covered like a million of that $9M. So the Angels owed him like $8M

[Angels 1961]

Halos want to contend you need a closer. Raisel one of the best sign him or he'll end up with Dodgers

[Angel Oracle]

This team sucked at closing games for 5 years.

Where are they going to find another proven closer?????

[failos]

[Angel Oracle]

1 hour ago, WicketMaiden said:

Trying to sign him is a no-brainer. How smart it is depends on where in this salary range he falls: 3/$42m looks a whole lot smarter than 4/$80m. 

Watch starry eyed Arte sign Chris Taylor instead for that 4 years/$80 million, just because he hit three HRs tonight.  And then watch Taylor morph into a .700 OPS guy like Albertross and Hackilton.

Arte deserved that jab, given how much he’s wasted on declining sluggers the past decade.

[totdprods]

I love considering contrarian takes and I applaud you for posting this, but I have a hard time seeing any way around trying to re-sign him. He was too good, the need is there, the money is there, the interest in mutual…unless Minasian can replicate that trade I think it’s a no-brainer.

I also would offer the QO. At $18m it really isn’t far from the salaries of Hendricks, Chapman, what Iglesias could make. If we lock him in at one year for a few mil more it removes the risk of a multi-year albatross too. Worth the extra $3-5m if he accepts.

[bruin5]

1 hour ago, Trendon said:

The Reds covered like a million of that $9M. So the Angels owed him like $8M

Thanks.  Forgot about that.  

[disarcina]

Yes - it makes sense but it's going cost some money

He pretty much resurrected his career in 2021 and now his value Is up.

But Halos had a real closer for the first time in a while.

[HanfordGuy]

It would be dumb not to resign him.

[Blarg]

Signing him to a qualifying offer would be a dumb move. Penning a three year deal wouldn't be. 

[ettin]

4 hours ago, Trendon said:

To begin, Raisel Iglesias was simply outstanding in 2021. It was a joy to watch him close out games, relatively stress free. He had some insanely dominant outings.

That being said, I pose the question: Is re-signing Raisel Iglesias the smart move?

For starters, he's likely going to command a 3-4 year deal with an AAV from $14-$20M. If he performs like he did last season, he's worth the money. But there's no guarantee that he does that. If he slips off, is he worth the large contract he deserves and will get? Then, you factor in that the Angels only have so much money to spend. Is utilizing a third or almost half the budget on a closer the proper move?

To directly answer the question re-signing is a smart move.

However, our budget will not accommodate Iglesias and one of the better available starters, so it seems less likely.

[ukyah]

58 minutes ago, ettin said:

To directly answer the question re-signing is a smart move.

However, our budget will not accommodate Iglesias and one of the better available starters, so it seems less likely.

then the angels can go F* themselves for not trading the premier closer at the deadline.

[Docwaukee]

Is it a wise baseball move to spend around 17m on a relief pitcher?  probably not.  What would actually make more sense is to use that money on two or even three solid relievers but that comes with caveats.  There are only about a dozen or so relievers who I feel are consistent enough on a yearly to warrant that type of contract and Iglesias is probably one of them.  So if you have that luxury from a payroll standpoint, then great.  But I'm not sure the halos do.  Could you spend less than half that and get good but not great production from a closer?  probably.  

It's kind of a no win to some degree.  Spending that much on a reliever and limiting your budget elsewhere sucks.  Losing your best reliever and not trading him for a decent haul when you had a chance sucks too.  

[ThisismineScios]

In theory, the smart thing to do is acquire Player X, Y, and Z for only $_____. However, it never happens for us. We need to overpay Iglesias to solidify the back end. It was a strength for us this year--I think we didn't lose a game we led after 8. If we can secure him, we approach free agency with some confidence in our bullpen. Also, I think something I'm excited about and wondering but nobody else seems to be--where is Chris Rodriguez going to end up? I really, really think that he needs to be a reliever. He can be an elite reliever in the Josh Hader mold. And that, to me, is much more valuable than wondering if he can get to 100 IP every year because of his violent delivery. Just put him in the pen and let him be a high leverage guy. Him, Iglesias, Mayers, and 3-4 of the young guys that proves themselves would make a heck of a bullpen. 

[Angelsjunky]

5 hours ago, mmc said:

It’s not my money

[Stradling]

6 hours ago, ThisismineScios said:

In theory, the smart thing to do is acquire Player X, Y, and Z for only $_____. However, it never happens for us. We need to overpay Iglesias to solidify the back end. It was a strength for us this year--I think we didn't lose a game we led after 8. If we can secure him, we approach free agency with some confidence in our bullpen. Also, I think something I'm excited about and wondering but nobody else seems to be--where is Chris Rodriguez going to end up? I really, really think that he needs to be a reliever. He can be an elite reliever in the Josh Hader mold. And that, to me, is much more valuable than wondering if he can get to 100 IP every year because of his violent delivery. Just put him in the pen and let him be a high leverage guy. Him, Iglesias, Mayers, and 3-4 of the young guys that proves themselves would make a heck of a bullpen. 

I don’t want Rodriguez in the pen because he’s a 4 pitch pitcher.  On top of that there’s more injury risk pitching 50-70 games on an unpredictable schedule than there is starting 28-32 games every fifth day. 

[totdprods]

10 hours ago, Blarg said:

Signing him to a qualifying offer would be a dumb move. Penning a three year deal wouldn't be. 

You don’t really sign someone to a QO. You utilize it to gain compensation if the player walks and, unofficially, to potentially tag a player in a way that gives you a leg up in negotiating. It can scare other teams off. 

If Iglesias’ camp knows he’s entering FA with a QO attached, they should know there’s a solid chance teams will be more leery to move on him first - they’ll explore other options without risking losing a pick - and then when they do negotiate, they’ll try to knock the salary down because they’ll lose a pick.

It gives the Angels an advantage in negotiating their own deal. If Iglesias accepts a QO, it’s on him, but I think he’d rather sign a 3/$48m or 4/$64m given how much relievers can vary than a 1/$18m.
 

Ultimately, you stick him with a QO and the Angels will have a better chance at getting him on a multi-year deal, with the only risk being he takes the QO and it costs you $4m more in ‘22 salary. If he walks, draft pick. If we have $20-$30m to spend this off-season, yeah, I wouldn’t do it, but with $50-$60m on the table there should be wiggle room to account for if he takes the QO.

Edited October 22, 2021 by totdprods

[ThisismineScios]

57 minutes ago, Stradling said:

I don’t want Rodriguez in the pen because he’s a 4 pitch pitcher.  On top of that there’s more injury risk pitching 50-70 games on an unpredictable schedule than there is starting 28-32 games every fifth day. 

I agree with you on him in principle; a legitimate 4-pitch pitcher who can be a frontline guy. His stuff is just nasty. But it just doesn't seem like his body can handle 180 innings. I know last year was really his first full year, but he came in fully healthy and dealt with two major injuries. I don't know if he is built for it or if his delivery can handle 30 starts. 

[Jason]

If they don’t sign him then closer becomes a position of weakness and need. Last time I checked good closers aren’t that plentiful