Tanaka or Garza?

[Mark68]

Tanaka, by a very wide margin. A margin big enough for Santa, his sleigh, his bag o' goodies and all 9 reindeer to fit through.

[Jeff Fletcher]

You guys realize that it's not really a choice for the Angels. These are free agents. They play where they want to play. The only way you can really "force" a guy to play for you is if you blow away the market. In that case you're usually overpaying.

I'm sure the Angels would prefer Tanaka, but there is no way they make Tanaka pick them over the Dodgers and Yankees with money, so it's up to Tanaka.

As for Garza, the Angels don't like him enough to overpay for him, so I think they'll be in the same general neighborhood as a few other teams and it will be up to him.

I say Tanaka gets 6/110 and Garza 4/65, with an option.

[Homebrewer]

You guys realize that it's not really a choice for the Angels. These are free agents. They play where they want to play. The only way you can really "force" a guy to play for you is if you blow away the market. In that case you're usually overpaying.

I'm sure the Angels would prefer Tanaka, but there is no way they make Tanaka pick them over the Dodgers and Yankees with money, so it's up to Tanaka.

As for Garza, the Angels don't like him enough to overpay for him, so I think they'll be in the same general neighborhood as a few other teams and it will be up to him.

I say Tanaka gets 6/110 and Garza 4/65, with an option.

Thanks Jeff...see my posts in the other Tanaka thread. ( those who don't want Tanaka)

It is up to TANAKA where he plays, and I don't really see any huge reason for him to choose the Halos.

Not really excited at all about Garza.

I see a J Santana signing, and hoping that the returns on Trumbo will be ready and able.

Edited December 25, 2013 by Homebrewer

[Inside Pitch]

.

As for Garza, the Angels don't like him enough to overpay for him, so I think they'll be in the same general neighborhood as a few other teams and it will be up to him.

 

 

 

Good to hear!

[Brent Maguire]

Thanks for posting here Jeff. Really cool to have someone with inside info giving us news.

Tanaka at 6/110 with the 20 million dollar fee doesn't sound too bad to me.

[AngelsLakersFan]

Honestly, a rotation of Weaver/Wilson/Tanaka/Richards/Santiago with Skaggs in AAA coming up later in the season if one of Richards/Santiago don't play up to their potential is honestly a top 10 pitching staff. Santiago could be a solid #4 for us with the park change and his peripherals are heading in the right direction.

 

Richards also has strong #4 potential, with a slight chance of being a solid #3 for us. Skaggs obviously has #2-#3 potential but we'll see how he progresses this year. That's potentially three #2's (Weaver, Wilson & Tanaka), two #3's (Skaggs, Richards) and one #4 (Santiago) in our rotation.

 

I really like this because it's not counting on anyone doing more than they might be capable of and it's not asking everyone to stay healthy.

 

A top 3 of Weaver/Wilson/Tanaka is not the best top 3 in baseball but three guys who I think we can count on to keep us in any game we play against any other team. Richards is a great #5 starter who has the upside of being a #3, Skaggs, has #2 potential and he might not make the rotation out right, and Santiago would only be asked to maintain his status as a #4, who very well might be capable of pitching closer to a #3.

 

The problem this team ran into last year was expecting everyone to stay healthy and play to the upper limits of their ability. As we saw, that was completely unreasonable. This year we could be expecting Joe Blanton to be an adequate #7 or #8 starter, which is a lot more in line with his capabilities than last year when we were looking for him to be a #3 or #4.

[Docwaukee]

It will be very interesting to see if trying to lure Tanaka with extra money will even be an option.  I don't think an extra 10 or 20 mil will be as big of a deal in his decision making process as it would for typical US free agents. 

 

The halos know what their end game is with either of these guys, but we don't.  There are obvious financial considerations in all of this, and the bit of uncertainty around Tanaka's ability obviously needs to be factored in on this. 

 

Four seasons from Garza probably has a range of 8-12 WAR or 2-3 WAR per whereas six or seven seasons from Tanaka probably ranges from 12-28 or 2-4 per.  The AAV for Garza is likely in the 16-18 range whereas Tanaka will cost you nearly 20.  So using Garza's years as the baseline, they probably have a similar low end comp with Tanaka costing about 2-4mil per more.  Is the extra 8-16mil over the next 4 years worth the chance of Tanaka being a 4 WAR pitchers?

 

We have to remember that Garza has some significant question marks surrounding him as well (injury, one of the best available, makeup etc.).  He's no lock to be a what he was by any stretch.  Does Tanaka make up the additional 10-20% value needed to offset his salary?  It seems worth the risk because of his age alone. 

 

I think part of the problem is perception.  We think Tanaka is going to be Darvish, and he's likely not going to be.  We think Garza is going to be CJ, and he's likely going to be worse than that.  I don't really know where to put Tanaka, but Garza had a WAR of 9.2 for his age 25-28 seasons.  He's very unlikely to do that for his age 31-34 seasons as he's averaged 1.4 WAR the last two years. 

 

The other thing to consider is that it's unlikely to get much on the FA market from pitchers going forward and Tanaka stands to be the better player the next four years regardless of salary.  It's fine to consider his $/WAR but that is contingent on there being a replacement available if we don't get him.  Another pitcher on the FA market that could get the team 4 seasons of 3+ WAR or better.  We can pretty much assume that there isn't going to be or at least none that would cost any less. 

 

Even with the market spinning out of control, I still think Garza is going to be at the top of the list of overpaid players the next four years even if he gets 15mil per.  I just don't think he's all that good.  I am going to predict that Phil Hughes outperforms him next year. 

 

Here's what I'd like to see them do at this point. 

1. Go hard after Tanaka

2. Try to trade Aybar for pitching.  If you can get something similar to what you got for Trumbo, then great.  Even a little less is ok. Get another strong reliever

3. If the above two don't happen then move on and sign two guys to one year deals.  If the above happens, sign one guy to a one year deal.  (a capuano or hammels type).  Get a strong reliever one way or the other.

4. Garza is gonna get 5/90 imo.  4/70 is not great and I wouldn't be thrilled.  3/45 is justified and not going to happen in this market.  Steer clear of this guy if you can. 

[Scott34]

It will be very interesting to see if trying to lure Tanaka with extra money will even be an option. I don't think an extra 10 or 20 mil will be as big of a deal in his decision making process as it would for typical US free agents.

The halos know what their end game is with either of these guys, but we don't. There are obvious financial considerations in all of this, and the bit of uncertainty around Tanaka's ability obviously needs to be factored in on this.

Four seasons from Garza probably has a range of 8-12 WAR or 2-3 WAR per whereas six or seven seasons from Tanaka probably ranges from 12-28 or 2-4 per. The AAV for Garza is likely in the 16-18 range whereas Tanaka will cost you nearly 20. So using Garza's years as the baseline, they probably have a similar low end comp with Tanaka costing about 2-4mil per more. Is the extra 8-16mil over the next 4 years worth the chance of Tanaka being a 4 WAR pitchers?

We have to remember that Garza has some significant question marks surrounding him as well (injury, one of the best available, makeup etc.). He's no lock to be a what he was by any stretch. Does Tanaka make up the additional 10-20% value needed to offset his salary? It seems worth the risk because of his age alone.

I think part of the problem is perception. We think Tanaka is going to be Darvish, and he's likely not going to be. We think Garza is going to be CJ, and he's likely going to be worse than that. I don't really know where to put Tanaka, but Garza had a WAR of 9.2 for his age 25-28 seasons. He's very unlikely to do that for his age 31-34 seasons as he's averaged 1.4 WAR the last two years.

The other thing to consider is that it's unlikely to get much on the FA market from pitchers going forward and Tanaka stands to be the better player the next four years regardless of salary. It's fine to consider his $/WAR but that is contingent on there being a replacement available if we don't get him. Another pitcher on the FA market that could get the team 4 seasons of 3+ WAR or better. We can pretty much assume that there isn't going to be or at least none that would cost any less.

Even with the market spinning out of control, I still think Garza is going to be at the top of the list of overpaid players the next four years even if he gets 15mil per. I just don't think he's all that good. I am going to predict that Phil Hughes outperforms him next year.

Here's what I'd like to see them do at this point.

1. Go hard after Tanaka

2. Try to trade Aybar for pitching. If you can get something similar to what you got for Trumbo, then great. Even a little less is ok. Get another strong reliever

3. If the above two don't happen then move on and sign two guys to one year deals. If the above happens, sign one guy to a one year deal. (a capuano or hammels type). Get a strong reliever one way or the other.

4. Garza is gonna get 5/90 imo. 4/70 is not great and I wouldn't be thrilled. 3/45 is justified and not going to happen in this market. Steer clear of this guy if you can.

This is a great post and I agree with almost everything you said.

[GregAlso]

Aybar will not get anything close to Trumbo. Trumbo's power got him overrated and returned that hall. Nobody out there would trade a single young cost controlled SP for Aybar's below league average hitting last year. Nobody should've traded so much for Trumbo.

Second, we only need one cost controlled cheap January signing coupled with maybe Balfor. If not Balfor than save the money. We only need temporary insurance for Skaggs. Richards & Santiago should be fine.

I agree, I'm not thrilled with Garza, especially at $90 million. Don't like his personality and 1.5-2 WAR pitcher barely seems worth it. Shouldn't pay him more than $14 million per and no more than 4 years. I doubt that would sign him either.

[Brent Maguire]

Doc summed it up perfectly.

I like the idea of Maholm or Capuano and adding Balfour. That gives us rotation depth and our bullpen looks a heck of a lot better.

[Docwaukee]

Aybar will not get anything close to Trumbo. Trumbo's power got him overrated and returned that hall. Nobody out there would trade a single young cost controlled SP for Aybar's below league average hitting last year. Nobody should've traded so much for Trumbo.

Second, we only need one cost controlled cheap January signing coupled with maybe Balfor. If not Balfor than save the money. We only need temporary insurance for Skaggs. Richards & Santiago should be fine.

I agree, I'm not thrilled with Garza, especially at $90 million. Don't like his personality and 1.5-2 WAR pitcher barely seems worth it. Shouldn't pay him more than $14 million per and no more than 4 years. I doubt that would sign him either.

 

I was surprised with the haul for Trumbo and didn't think he'd get us two cost controlled guys with upside.  All it takes is the right partner.  Not saying it exists, but it's certainly something I am hoping Jerry investigates.  If not, a couple of 1yr guys, maybe 1 that could eat innings and another with upside coming off injury as well as a pen guy would do the trick.  The more I think about adding Garza, the more I realize that he's not the answer. 

[Stradling]

Garza at the right price would fill a need. I'd rather have Tanaka but I'd rather have Garza at the right price than standing pat. The right price is around 4 years and about $60 million.

[Chuck]

Garza at the right price would fill a need. I'd rather have Tanaka but I'd rather have Garza at the right price than standing pat. The right price is around 4 years and about $60 million.

 

Yep. That's my take. I'd rather have Tanaka, but Garza is a close second. Either one would put the bow-tie on what was an awesome offseason gift by Dipoto and gang this winter.

[Brent Maguire]

Garza is fine if he's at 4/55 or something in that range I guess. I've soured a bit on the idea of bringing him aboard. The injuries and age aren't very encouraging. 

 

He does make the 2014 team better which is a reason why I wouldn't mind bringing him aboard if the deal could somehow be shorter.