Jump to content
  • Welcome to AngelsWin.com

    AngelsWin.com - THE Internet Home for Angels fans! Unraveling Angels Baseball ... One Thread at a Time.

    Register today to comment and join the most interactive online Angels community on the net!

    Once you're a member you'll see less advertisements. If you become a Premium member and you won't see any ads! 

     

IGNORED

Colon and Ulbado?


Erstad Grit

Recommended Posts

These 2 SP would make me stoked about the team and our chances.

 

I say forget the 150 mil it would take to get Tanaka and grab these two guys.

 

If they cost too much (not my money?????) trading HK for a prospect to free up the cash would be worth it. 

 

Weaver

Wilson

Jimenez

Colon

Richards

 

That is a World Series bound rotation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well if we continue down this path, it'll be 5 Blanton's in 2015.  You. Need. A. Farm. To. Win.

 

Normally I would agree with you 100%. However our team is horribly structured with huge backloaded contracts which makes me think winning during the years 2016-2019 is going to be VERY unlikely. So as bad as it sounds going all in to win during 2014- 2015 (hoping Pujols and Hamilton rebound)  and being prepared to suck later makes the most sense to me. Keep in mind I was not a supporter of the V Wells, Pujols, Hamilton deals. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Normally I would agree with you 100%. However our team is horribly structured with huge backloaded contracts which makes me think winning during the years 2016-2019 is going to be VERY unlikely. So as bad as it sounds going all in to win during 2014- 2015 (hoping Pujols and Hamilton rebound)  and being prepared to suck later makes the most sense to me. Keep in mind I was not a supporter of the V Wells, Pujols, Hamilton deals. 

Except for one thing. We have Mike Trout. Do you really want to waste Trout's prime years?

 

Would be better off rebuilding now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like Ubaldo. Losing the draft pick for him absolutely sucks though.

I guess if we can't find any starters, I would be ok with signing him and losing the pick. It definitely seems like he figured something out in the 2nd half last year. If he provided 180 innings of 3.8 ERA and 170 K's, it might be worth losing the pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except for one thing. We have Mike Trout. Do you really want to waste Trout's prime years?

Would be better off rebuilding now.

With the talent and money invested, we aren't going to rebuild.

Backloaded contracts don't matter as it's an average salary that counts towards the cap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except for one thing. We have Mike Trout. Do you really want to waste Trout's prime years?

 

Would be better off rebuilding now.

 

In 2016 we will be paying Weaver, Pujols, and Hamilton 79 million dollars. In 2017 we will be paying Pujols/Hamilton 58 million. I'd rather take a shot now when getting production from these guys is still somewhat realistic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the talent and money invested, we aren't going to rebuild.

Backloaded contracts don't matter as it's an average salary that counts towards the cap.

 

And what happens if the angels finish 3rd again and pujols and hamilton continue to decline? Still no rebuild?

Just rinse and repeat every year until the team is too far gone in debt to even rebuild?

Edited by Poozy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

once they signed the monster contracts they were stuck for better or worse. rebuilding also negates what you attempted to do when you brought them and other high prices players in the first place.

retooling is an option, but not rebuilding unless you pull a Marlins and are able to dump significant salary. you're also only retooling during prime player production years....you're not going to rebuild when you think a great player has something in the tank, but can consider it when you anticipate their heavy decline years. thus, I'm not sure you're adding new significant debt since it's already established.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jimenez WHIP in the second half was incredible. That's when things turned around for Jimenez as he made a change to his mechanics.

 

To get to a 1.33 WHIP, if his second half was incredible, that would mean his first half was Bantonesque.  Not a good selling point, for a team that makes it a habit to take off the first half lately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To get to a 1.33 WHIP, if his second half was incredible, that would mean his first half was Bantonesque. Not a good selling point, for a team that makes it a habit to take off the first half lately.

I agree with your last sentence. In the first half, he had a 1.49 WHIP and in the second half he had a 1.14 WHIP. Over the past three seasons, he's been decent (for a #4 or #5 type of pitcher) for half the season, and terrible for half of the season (usually the second half of the season).

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/players/7900/splits/?season=2013

Edited by AngelsAndRamsFan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The issue here is the loss of a pick for a guy that had a pretty bad time of it in Cleveland until he somehow found it again starting around mid-June.

 

That could've been avoided had they simply tried to negotiate a three year extension with Santana for a lower AAV in the $8-9M dollar range, which he may have taken.

 

Or of course, just exercising his option, keeping him, not signing Joe Blanton for more money over two years, also not signing Hanson or Madson and letting Richards and Williams have the fifth spot. They could've waited until Madson or Brian Wilson proved they were ready before they signed either of them…They also could've signed a guy on a one year deal for third, but that's a personal pet peeve negated now that they acquired Grant Green for Callaspo and got out of his second year.

 

In 2013, the $$ spent on Blanton was 6.5 M plus 3.725M plus the $2M they gave Madson plus the $1M they paid of Santana's option = $13.2 which is the exact figure they'd gave paid for him anyway. DiPoto thought he was getting two starters for the price of one plus a reliever, but they got screwed here, and ended up spending $$$ for less production.

 

And they may have been in position to get a pick for Santana, instead of surrendering one for Jimenez. Or they could sign Jimenez instead and not sign Santana. And they'd have 7.5M more money to spend this year.

 

Anyway you look at it, the Blanton/Hanson/Madson v. Santana or Haren was a bad deal for so many reasons.

Link to comment
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.

×
×
  • Create New...