Ken Rosenthal: Dipoto said they're interested in Matt Garza

[Scott34]

I believe Colon is looking for a 2yr deal around $10-$12 million per season

 

So?

 

I'd probably do 2-20

[ten ocho recon scout]

Given that he hasn't pitched 200 innings since 2010, I'd be shocked if he gets 80 million. Whatever deal he gets, if it's from the Angels it better have incentives up the butt. I'd do something like 4 years/52 million with a team option for a 5th year worth 15 million. Each year +2 million for 200 IP, +1 million for a sub 4 ERA. +1 million for 175 K's. So worst case the Angels get Garza for 4 years/52 million and he's Vargas the asshole reboot. Best case he takes the incentives seriously and earns some extra cash for pitching better.

if we're gonna sign a FA pitcher with incentives up the butt, shouldn't it be colon?....

[AngelsAndRamsFan]

This MLBTR writer and the Rangers beat writer think Colon would be open to a one year deal. I don't buy it this early in the offseason.

 

    Rangers Have Interest in Bartolo Colon

By Charlie Wilmoth [December 10 at 5:38pm CST]

The Rangers have interest in starting pitcher Bartolo Colon, Jeff Wilson of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram writes. Colon would provide the Rangers with a backup plan in case Matt Harrison isn't ready to come back from injuries that limited him to two big-league starts in 2013. If Harrison is healthy, Colon would likely bump Alexi Ogando to the bullpen.

 

Colon will be 41 shortly after the start of the 2014 season, so he could very well be available to the Rangers on a one-year basis. Wilson notes that a one-year deal would be attractive for the Rangers, who might have Luke Jackson or other prospects knocking on the door by 2015. Colon posted a 2.65 ERA with 5.5 K/9 and 1.4 BB/9 in 190 1/3 innings with the Athletics last season.

Edited December 11, 2013 by AngelsAndRamsFan

[gotbeer]

Depends on the price.  4/$60 sure.

 

But I have a feeling he's going to look for a 5+ year starting at $20 million+ per.  He's only 30.  He's the biggest fish in the pond.  And mediocre pitchers are getting $10 million.  Plus he won't cost a pick like Santana and Jimenez will.  And with many teams needing good starting pitching, his 7 seasons in a row of sub 4.00 ERA pitching means he is in the drivers seat.  

[Season Over]

So?

 

I'd probably do 2-20

 

How is being a jerk on Twitter worse than getting suspended for PEDs?

[Pujols4MVP]

I believe Colon is looking for a 2yr deal around $10-$12 million per season

If the Angels signed Colon for 2 years he would suddenly get hurt in a game, then start throwing in the low 90s the next season & suck.'

Then after being booed out of the stadium again he would somehow rebound with the A's again on a 1 year deal.

[Inside Pitch]

Giving him CJ Wilson type money is fair based on 7 straight seasons of a sub 4.00 ERA. He has quality stuff. I don't mind the fact that he faded in that Texas heat down the stretch, the entire Rangers club was shitty down the stretch.

 

Garza is a true #3 and could be a #1 on many other clubs out there.

 

Do it, Jerry!

 

 

Except that CJ Wilson was pitching significantly better than Garza....  

 

"It isn't the high price of stars that is expensive, it's the high price of mediocrity." -- Bill Veek

 

Matt Garza is a career 108 ERA pitcher. 

[Inside Pitch]

Given that he hasn't pitched 200 innings since 2010, I'd be shocked if he gets 80 million. Whatever deal he gets, if it's from the Angels it better have incentives up the butt. I'd do something like 4 years/52 million with a team option for a 5th year worth 15 million. Each year +2 million for 200 IP, +1 million for a sub 4 ERA. +1 million for 175 K's. So worst case the Angels get Garza for 4 years/52 million and he's Vargas the asshole reboot. Best case he takes the incentives seriously and earns some extra cash for pitching better.

 

 

This I could get behind of.  4/52 is more than he's worth but not horrible.  CJ Wilson money..  No.

Edited December 11, 2013 by Inside Pitch

[Stradling]

So, if they sign Garza, who would you guys prefer to see in the pen between Richards, Skaggs and Santiago? I am guessing if Skaggs didn't make the starting rotation he would end up back in the minors?

[Quinlanforthewin]

More than 4 years no more than 60 and I'm good with it.  We already traded for one moron in Freese, why not sign another?  

 

I don't think he's worth that money.  I don't think he's even necessarily better than Santiago.  But I'm all for getting as many decent starting pitchers as possible so we don't have to see Blanton.  Plus he's only 30 so if we give him 4 years he wouldn't be ancient at the end of the contract. 

[Quinlanforthewin]

So, if they sign Garza, who would you guys prefer to see in the pen between Richards, Skaggs and Santiago? I am guessing if Skaggs didn't make the starting rotation he would end up back in the minors?

 

Richards has to start.  I'd give Skaggs a chance to start and if he struggles send him to AAA.  Last year Santiago proved he could bounce back and forth between the pen and starting rotation without losing anything so I think he's the best option for a swing man. 

[Blarg]

http://espn.go.com/dallas/mlb/story/_/id/9537663/matt-garza-texas-rangers-apologizes-sexist-rant-oakland-eric-sogard-wife

 

http://mlb.si.com/2013/05/27/matt-garza-johnny-cueto-reds-cubs/

 

etc

 

Scott, that has nothing to do with being a clubhouse cancer or his teammates not liking him. That was Garza going off on other team's players for on field events.

 

So how about something where a teammate, coach or GM has a word or two about him and not from an opposing team.

[tdawg87]

Richards earned a look as a full time starter. The good thing is that if he flakes out they now have Skaggs as backup, who frankly has a much higher upside.

[Angels]

Garza is going to get more than he deserves because he won't cost you a draft pick and the free agent market for SP is weak. The market price for a win (WAR) keeps on rising, too. Teams are getting richer and are shelling out more cash for free agents.

 

Not that I think the Angels should spend crazily, but 4/60 (tops) for Garza wouldn't be terrible, IMO. An overpay, sure, but not something that one can initially say is a disaster of a signing

Edited December 11, 2013 by Angels

[Stradling]

A Garza signing makes sense. It basically means we won't be in the market for a starter for a few couple of years. Not sure what the future looks like as it relates to starters on the open market, but more times than not these days high ceiling starters aren't making it to free agency.

[Blarg]

Except that CJ Wilson was pitching significantly better than Garza....  

 

"It isn't the high price of stars that is expensive, it's the high price of mediocrity." -- Bill Veek

 

Matt Garza is a career 108 ERA pitcher. 

That makes him better than Hughes, right?

[Scott34]

That makes him better than Hughes, right?

 

All joking aside, not much better.

[Inside Pitch]

That makes him better than Hughes, right?

 

That's never been in question.   The better value has been.  

 

If you think it's a good use of money to spend 75-80 mil over 5 years Vs 24 mil over 3 years, fine.

 

I happen to think that would be rather dumb.

Edited December 11, 2013 by Inside Pitch

[ukyah]

Scott, that has nothing to do with being a clubhouse cancer or his teammates not liking him. That was Garza going off on other team's players for on field events.

 

So how about something where a teammate, coach or GM has a word or two about him and not from an opposing team.

 

 

 i was thinking the same thing. i read both of those because i had never heard of garza being a clubhouse cancer.

 

obviously, the twitter thing was stupid, but i think twitter is stupid anyway and would ban any of my players being on it if i was a gm, because nothing good has ever come of it athletically.

 

the 2nd article was him directly sticking up for a fellow cub. 

 

clubhouse cancer? i think not.

[Docwaukee]

sure he'll help, he just seems unlikely to be worth anything he's gonna get paid. 

[Angels]

If the Angels want a potentially huge bargain, they should sign Colon. Colon from 2011-2013>Garza from 2011-2013

 

1/10 with a club option for $10 million would be super. The Angels would be better off doing that than signing Garza.

[Blarg]

That's never been in question.   The better value has been.  

 

If you think it's a good use of money to spend 75-80 mil over 5 years Vs 24 mil over 3 years, fine.

 

I happen to think that would be rather dumb.

 

I think it would be a waste of money to pay $24 million for Phil Hughes because we already have two cost controlled back of the rotation guys.

 

Again, pay for bottled water or walk 50 miles in the desert heat to drink from an old hose. The hose costs less.

[fan_since79]

I agree Chuck.  If healthy, Garza would be a nice addition.  He has been very, very consistent over the years.

 

I can't think of any other active pitcher with 7 straight years of sub-4.00 ERA. That's unheard of these days.

 

 

edit: okay, Sabathia from 2006-2012. Perhaps there are some others.

Edited December 11, 2013 by fan_since79

[David]

I would be happy with Garza for the right price. This is a nice little highlight video for him....

[Inside Pitch]

I think it would be a waste of money to pay $24 million for Phil Hughes because we already have two cost controlled back of the rotation guys.

 

Again, pay for bottled water or walk 50 miles in the desert heat to drink from an old hose. The hose costs less.

 

Cute..   Completely irrelevant and a great example of a straw man fallacy but very cute.