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 join the most interactive online Angels community on the net!

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

     

To the people who don't want Tanaka..


Recommended Posts

There are some posters here who don't want us ''over-paying'' for Tanaka. Sorry to tell you but you better get used to it, there aren't going to be any legit #2-#3 pitchers on the market for any less in the up-coming years. The price for good pitching is going to go up exponentially, and unless you're a team like the Cardinals, Mariners, Rays or whatever other team that drafts home grown, quality pitchers (we aren't one of them) you will have to give (even if it means over paying) to get. 

 

Tanaka is worth the risk, name #1's/#2/even legitimate #3 pitchers who are entering FA in the upcoming years (inb4 someone names guys who are guaranteed to re-sign this year) who won't cost alot? I mean even good season every odd year Santana is slated to make north of 100m in FA. 

 

Point is, there is nothing more coveted in baseball (other than young, quality, cost controlled pitching) than a solid top of the order starting pitcher. So overpaying is a given.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. This guy has good stuff and is a bulldog. Pitched complete game NBS series game 6 and pitched and got the save the day in game 7 after pitching 160 pitches the day before. Imagine throwing 160 pitches in the MLB and pitch counts. This guy is a complete game guy and will save bullpen on most part of the game he pitches. He will need the least from the bullpen than other pitcher which will make the bullpen stronger and we have improved the bullpen this off season as well. Tanaka is a must get. Not only from helping the Angels but ensuring he does not sign with Seattle or Texas and make them stronger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There were people here that didn't want to go after Anibal Sanchez because he would command a Weaver like contract and that would be some kind of disrespect to Weaver?

I even read something the other day to the same affect regarding Tanaka.

I'm not going to name names, but this is exactly the type of stuff I've been reading recently. I was even going to mention Sanchez in my OP, but his contract would have been much cheaper than what Tanaka is most likely getting (it's the same thing though, 2 years from now we'll be complaining when we're offering someone of lesser value than Tanaka more money). Oh my god how a Weaver/Sanchez contract would help this team out right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also to the point about Tanaka being a complete game pitcher.

 

''His 53 complete games and 18 shutouts in Japanese League play both would be tops in MLB among active pitchers. The current active leaders are CC Sabathia (37 complete games) and Tim Hudson (13 shutouts).'' 

 

I'm pretty sure both of those feats were accomplished in Japan... against Japanese hitters...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a reason nobody has made a serious offer to Garza yet.  It's because everybody who might be in on him would much rather have Tanaka, and Garza is clearly the back-up plan.  He's the barfly chick that is always there, and she'll only get action after all the 10s, 9s, 8s, and 7s have left the bar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Glen, you're awful (but funny, and accurate, I think).

 

Halos of Anaheim, your view is overly simplistic, in my opinion, because it treats Tanaka like a can't miss pitcher and looks at a Tanaka contract in a vacuum, that is without any impact on the rest of the franchise.

 

First of all, remember that not all Japanese pitchers translate to MLB in the same way. The assumption based upon probably contract is that he's going to be another Yu Darvish, but he could also be another Daisuke Matsuzaka (and I've read that his overall ability is a notch below both those guys). And of course there's the ghost of Hideki Irabu. Among the Japanese starters that I can remember, Darvis, Kuroda, and Iwakuma have been strong successes, Nomo was pretty good (although his first year was his best), Matsuzaka had one good year but collapsed, and Irabu was pretty much a disaster. So while I think Tanaka is more likely to be successful than not, there's no guarantee without some kind of major league track record.

 

Don't get me wrong, I hope the Angels get Tanaka - I think he's less risky than Matsuzaka or Irabu, although I don't think he'll be as good as Darvish. If Darvish is a legit #1 then I think Tanaka will be a legit #2 (like Kuroda), or maybe a #3.

 

But here's the problem: including posting fee, he's going to cost at least $20 million a year, maybe as much as $25 million. How many proven major league starters would you give that kind of money to? Maybe ten? Half a dozen? And to give 5-6 years for a relative unknown quantity at $20-25 million a year? That's borderline madness.

 

Tanaka is a risk. Maybe not a huge one in that his floor seems higher than Dice-K and Irabu. But imagine if the Angels post the $20MM, then sign Tanaka for 6/$120MM, which would end up being a net cost of over $23MM a year. Add that to Pujols and Hamilton and you have three potential massive albatrosses that could literally sink this franchise. In other words, imagine the scenario in which Pujols and Hamilton don't bounce back and Tanaka disappoints. Maybe that's rather unlikely, but it is possible.

 

On the other hand, if you can get Garza for 5/$75MM or so, its still a lot to pay for a #3 starter but you know what you're getting - and you're paying a lot less for it. I personally wouldn't want the Angels to offer more than, say, 4/$65MM, but I wouldn't be appalled at 5/$75MM.

 

Another thing to keep in mind is that while there's a dearth of free agent pitching available, the Angels just acquired two young, cheap and club-controlled starters, one of whom has #2 potential and the other who could be a legit #3. Add Richards and his #3 potential to the mix and you've got a solid rotation for the next 3 years while Weaver and Wilson are still around. So the Angels rotation isn't in bad shape. A lot can happen in three years, so by 2017 when the Weaver and Wilson contracts expire, we'll know what Richards, Skaggs and Santiago are, and hopefully at least one or two of Mark Sappington, Hunter Green, Kenyon Middleton, and Ricardo Sanchez will have developed well, not to mention any other draft picks coming up.

 

Again, I'm not saying the Angels shouldn't go after Tanaka, but I am saying that there's a valid argument why they should let this one go and focus on building within.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From everything I've read, Tanaka looks like he'll be a legitimate #3 pitcher even if he doesn't reach his peak. A 1.20 ERA in Japan (his park was very hitter friendly as well) should easily translate to Weaver numbers, around 3.20 ERA (Not my calculations, Fangraphs) behind our defense and bottom 5 hitters park. 

 

I have no problem with your reasoning, but my first post was more about the whole ''being afraid of over-paying'' thing. Tanaka's price for a 25 year old with potential #1/#2 stuff is fair enough in this pitching economy, and it'll only get more expensive. I mean how many 25 year olds are even going to hit FA from here on out? Every team has their young guns locked until ages 26-27 and the ones that aren't, get re-signed instantly.

 

We can't rely on all 3 of Santiago, Richards and Skaggs this year. It would be wise to assume that one of them flops or doesn't progress fast enough. Adding Garza would be a huge mistake at 5 years, he has a terrible history with injuries and his best is behind him imo. He will most likely be a very good #4 for us, something we already have with the young guys. Tanaka isn't that big of a question mark, he's as close to a sure thing as it gets. At the very worst we just end up having another #4 to go along with our abundance of #3/#4's and we live on. At his very best, he could be just as good as Darvish, or at least very close.

Edited by Halos of Anaheim
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mentioned that his projected price was going to be double Weaver's contract, just to point out the fact of the matter. Never said I didn't "want" him, because I am a charter member of the "not my money" brigade. It isn't my money, I don't really believe (as  many do) that the luxury tax is a real concern for Arte when there is a difference maker to be had, and I would love to have the guy.

 

All that said, he is going to have a choice between a crapload of teams which are all going to be offering similar money, and I just don't see him choosing the Angels. When was the last time a big name free agent came to the Angels for any reason other than contract?

Weave stayed, but he was already here.

After Pujols and Hamilton, who really thinks that Arte is going to make an offer that nobody else can come close to?

Who really wants him to?

 

Last point...we already have the best player in baseball. Personally, I would much rather lock Trout up for a decade than throw the world at Tanaka. Anyone think they can, or will, do both?

Not my money, and I would love to see it happen.

I just don't believe it is realistic to think it will.

 

In the end it is most likely a moot point. Arte and Dipoto will make a competitive offer, but my gut feeling (educated guess) is that he will choose a bigger stage...or Seattle for better sushi.

Edited by Homebrewer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The real question is ................... Is it worth to pay a #2-3 SP 25 mil/y?

The money is relative. West coast team with a Japanese star puts Japanese butts in the expensive seats, and fills the camera wells and press boxes with cameras and reporters. The "buzz" is worth money, and lots of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The real question is ................... Is it worth to pay a #2-3 SP 25 mil/y?

He's not getting paid 25m/year. 7 years/140 will most likely be the max, and that's including the 20m posting fee. So it's 7 years/120 which is 17m/y. Garza will be costing around 15m/yr. 2 mil difference for a pitcher 5 years younger with higher upside. 

Edited by Halos of Anaheim
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok since you mentioned that he is a bulldog and pitched all those complete games and he threw 160 pitches in a game I guess I'll ask this question. Any worry about being over used at an early age? Kinda like how people feel about what Lasorda use to do to pitchers.

Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't the Japanese league play less games than the MLB? The innings are long but the lack of games evens everything out if I'm not mistaken.

Edited by Halos of Anaheim
Link to comment
Share on other sites

>Best pitcher on the market

>Angels are desperate for a pitcher

>Angels fans don't want that pitcher

>Money that isn't theirs is the breaking point

We're a funny group.

Pretty much this. Lol @ getting taxed, let's be serious..Moreno doesn't care. In his mind, it would be convenient to avoid it, but if he has to go over it, he will.

 

It isn't your money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok since you mentioned that he is a bulldog and pitched all those complete games and he threw 160 pitches in a game I guess I'll ask this question. Any worry about being over used at an early age? Kinda like how people feel about what Lasorda use to do to pitchers.

 

The arm is definitely a concern.  You don't know how he will translate to the MLB workload of less innings more games.  Going every 5 days instead of every 7.  And what damage has pitching all those innings already done?    

 

The other concern I have is him coming to the US and overthrowing the baseball.  You see these big guys up to the plate, and all these AW.com posters saying that power pitching is the only way to go in the MLB.  The big problem with Diaske and with Tanaka are they aren't power pitchers.  Where Darvish was.  If he doesn't adjust or someone pushes him to be something he's not, he can quickly become Daiske.  

 

Regardless of what anyone says, he is not without significant risks.  The question is, is his risk worth the amount of money that will be put up?  IMO, a 6/$90/$110 with posting is worth the risk.  But when you get into the $120-140 range.  You are talking about paying a guy that has never pitched in the MLB close to what we could have paid Greinke.  Heck, you subtract Felix's extra year, and he would make 6/$148.  

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...