Operation Clean Peanut

[Mark68]

I want you so, sooooo, bad....

She's so...

 

 

 

...Heavy

 

 

Edited January 10, 2014 by Mark68

[Stradling]

Well he's better than the other free agents, for one thing. That makes him different than other free agents.

Most teams will at least show interest in him. I can see 20 teams making the bid and trying to talk with him. I'm guessing at least 10 teams will offer something that will be considered a serious offer.

Well in my mind he is no different than when Greinke was a free agent. Every team had a chance to make him an offer. The Dodgers offered the most so he went there. The amount of teams isn't the reason the Angels probably won't get him. It is the teams that are interested in him that might prevent the Angels from signing him. If 20 teams wanted Tanaka but the Dodgers, Yankees, Boston, Mets, Phillies, Cardinals, Cubs, Nationals, Diamondbacks, and Rangers weren't interested, would you like the Angels chances? I sure would.

[Ohtaniland]

The fiscal liabilities that are already in place will prevent us from being serious contenders for Tanaka. Case in point, the contractual obligation tied to the final year for Vernon Wells woulda, coulda, shoulda just about covered the posting fee.  

[Stradling]

The Wells contract will have absolutely no bearing on whether or not we would pay a posting fee.

[arch stanton]

Maybe Tanaka likes the idea of getting multiple head-to-head match ups with Darvish. I haven't heard much about his priorities in selecting a team. 

 

I too, would rather sign 2 mid-tier pitchers than Garza. We have 3 pitcher with options and I am a firm believer that competition brings out the best in competitors. It might even create some attractive trade material if we need to shore up a position at mid season. I like the idea of Maholm and Hammel because I think Hammel is a prime candidate to be converted to the pen if required.

[Docwaukee]

Nice job Tdawg. 

 

I think Arte would see the marketing value of bringing in Tanaka of at least an offset to the CBT.  5 mil over this year for about a mil in tax with increased attendance and that is at least a wash. 

 

To address the question as to why Tanaka is different than other free agents - His age brings other suitors to the table.  Suitors that have been putting off making big plays for other free agent pitchers that won't have peak value during their upcoming window of opportunity.  Tanaka theoretically could. 

 

While I think that the halos have much better odds here than people think and certainly better than a 5% chance, the odds are against them getting him just by the sheer number of competitors and the money they have to spend.  But they have surprised us in the past.

 

The halos needed two full seasons worth of starts from their depth in 2013, but on average, you will need about 1.  Generally, those starts will come from two guys.  I think we can all assume that they will be adding at least one more guy for the rotation no matter what.  Leaving one rotation spot, and then the 6th/7th man till also fill a seasons worth of starts.  So that would leave Skaggs, Santiago, Mulder, Shoemaker to make two seasons worth of starts.  I think I'm ok with that at this point.

 

Since we need to get appropriate value out of our existing players, they do need the opportunity to pitch.  You don't want to waste potential prime years of guys like Skaggs and/or Santiago because you are obligated to give Capuano and Maholm innings.  You can structure the team for a reasonable degree of overlap, but no so much that players development is stunted. 

[Inside Pitch]

Wasn't last year Operation Clean Peanut?  With Blanton etc etc.  Yeah and that worked out so great.  Look we all know what will happen if the Angels don't seriously try and makes some moves here.

 

If you all want to be realists here.   This is what most likely is going to happen.

 

Angels don't get a big name pitcher.

Pujols struggles or gets hurt

Hamilton continues to suck.

Trout continues to rock but won't get MVP with a losing team.

Weaver slides just a bit more.

Meanwhile Trumbo hits 50 bombs and Angel fans want heads to roll.     There you go Happy New Year.

 

So, if the Angels don't get the guy you're crushing on, the sky will fall.  

 

Got it.   

 

I think most of us HOPE we get Tanaka, but you can't blame people for also having a plan B in case he goes elsewhere.

Edited January 10, 2014 by Inside Pitch

[Docwaukee]

Wasn't last year Operation Clean Peanut?  With Blanton etc etc.  Yeah and that worked out so great.  Look we all know what will happen if the Angels don't seriously try and makes some moves here.

 

If you all want to be realists here.   This is what most likely is going to happen.

 

Angels don't get a big name pitcher.

Pujols struggles or gets hurt

Hamilton continues to suck.

Trout continues to rock but won't get MVP with a losing team.

Weaver slides just a bit more.

Meanwhile Trumbo hits 50 bombs and Angel fans want heads to roll.     There you go Happy New Year.

all of the things listed are independent of whether we get Tanaka and could happen regardless.  Getting him guarantees nothing. 

[Brent Maguire]

Well in my mind he is no different than when Greinke was a free agent. Every team had a chance to make him an offer. The Dodgers offered the most so he went there. The amount of teams isn't the reason the Angels probably won't get him. It is the teams that are interested in him that might prevent the Angels from signing him. If 20 teams wanted Tanaka but the Dodgers, Yankees, Boston, Mets, Phillies, Cardinals, Cubs, Nationals, Diamondbacks, and Rangers weren't interested, would you like the Angels chances? I sure would.

With the way money is being thrown around right now, I wouldn't be surprised to see any team go out and get Tanaka. 

 

The difference between Tanaka and the rest of the FA is that Tanaka is young. Nobody hits free agency this early, which is a huge reason why Tanaka is going to get paid so well. If Tanaka had been posted as a 28 year old, the interest would be much lower because he would decline towards the end of the contract. 

 

 

I still think the Angels are a top 5 finalist to get Tanaka but I'm definitely not holding my breath and thinking it will actually happen. 

Edited January 10, 2014 by Angels_Baseball

[tdawg87]

I am sick of negative posts. Seriously if you got nothing positive to say about Tanaka just zip it. To write a whole book on why the Angels won't get the guy is completely ridiculous.

Tdawg I don't know you so this isn't personal here. But that was seriously the biggest load of speculative horse crap I have ever read. And to write it like you actually believe the spin you are putting on this blows my mind. Seriously complete BS. 20-1 odds? you got to be kidding me. Where did you get that arbitrary number? Acting like you are a seasoned book maker in Vegas or something.

In conclusion I just want you to own it if the Angels do sign the guy and not just blow that post off. Because it obviously took you some time to think up and write that Horsecrapmetrics.

lol

[Ohtaniland]

The Wells contract will have absolutely no bearing on whether or not we would pay a posting fee.

I didn't really say that. I referenced it because its a big chunk of the entire fiscal liability that's already in place for 2014. You can't just sweep $18.6M under the rug and pretend it has no impact. That contract absolutely has an inpact on the decisions being discussed for 2014. The posting fee for Tanaka is $20M so not having that $18.6M on the books would certainly make that pill easier to swallow.

[Stradling]

I look at one as a operating cost (posting fee), the other as part of payroll. But yes the payroll for Wells impacts the decision of signing him.

[Ohtaniland]

I look at one as a operating cost (posting fee), the other as part of payroll. But yes the payroll for Wells impacts the decision of signing him.

Strad, I would like to see Tanaka in our rotation but he's not the only solution. If the currently rostered impact players do their jobs things would get a lot easier.

[Jim]

At first glance the article looks too long to read, but the title is so amusing I think I might just give it a go. 

[Turd Ferguson]

I've read that teams have been scared off by Garza's medicals.  The last thing I would want is to miss out on Tanaka and then overpay for Garza out of desperation.  If we are going to pursue Garza, now is the time, before Tanaka signs.  As much as I like Tanaka and would love to have him, I don't see how the Yankees and/or Dodgers don't get him if they want him.  Might be best to snatch up Maholm and/or Capuano now and call it an offseason.  It wouldn't be a spectacular rotation but it certainly would be deep.

[stormngt]

So, if the Angels don't get the guy you're crushing on, the sky will fall.  

 

Got it.   

 

I think most of us HOPE we get Tanaka, but you can't blame people for also having a plan B in case he goes elsewhere.

There should always be a plan B.  So I have no problem with people speculating about what the options are in plan B.

[RallyMo]

I am sick of negative posts.  Seriously if you got nothing positive to say about Tanaka just zip it.  To write a whole book on why the Angels won't get the guy is completely ridiculous.  

 

Tdawg I don't know you so this isn't personal here.  But that was seriously the biggest load of speculative horse crap I have ever read.  And to write it like you actually believe the spin you are putting on this blows my mind.  Seriously complete BS. 20-1 odds?  you got to be kidding me.  Where did you get that arbitrary number?  Acting like you are a seasoned book maker in Vegas or something.

 

In conclusion I just want you to own it if the Angels do sign the guy and not just blow that post off.  Because it obviously took you some time to think up and write that Horsecrapmetrics.

 

Jeebus. Settle down, cap'n.

 

I'll take nutso reflexives for $1000, Alex:

[tdawg87]

It's funny because my post was in no way negative whatsoever. If anything it's taking a positive outlook at other options.

 

It's only negative if you think Tanaka is the end-all be-all to the Angels' offseason and that the Angels have a 100% chance of getting him. Considering his screenname, that seems to be the case.

[Stradling]

Strad, I would like to see Tanaka in our rotation but he's not the only solution. If the currently rostered impact players do their jobs things would get a lot easier.

I completely agree with what you said. I actually believe that if we don't see measurable improvement from both Albert and Josh the pitching won't really matter. I also agree that Tanaka isn't the only solution, but I think you need to see how it plays out with Tanaka before signing another, less affective pitcher. Now, if we saw a run on starting pitchers, where they were coming off of the market one after another, then I think you go out and sign a Capuano or Maholm. But all of those guys are still out there and most will be until Tanaka is off the market. I would also add one more thing. If you decide to sign a Capuano or a Maholm before Tanaka is off the board, I wouldn't let that stop me from continuing to negotiate with Tanaka. Depth is always a good thing.

[Chuck]

I've been saying all along that I believe we will NOT land Tanaka and that we should focus on Garza and be done with it. I think we have a shot at Tanaka, but I'm not counting on him coming here and I think that's where tdwag is at too.

 

That said, I'm not in favor of going after a Maholm or Capuano type. These guys were not very good in the NL and how many times have we seen a transition from the NL to AL where the pitcher was actually better in the AL than he was in the NL?

 

Go get Garza! I'm hoping for a 5 year, 65 million deal, with TONS of incentives where he can make an extra 15 million at 80 grand over 5 years. +200 innings, sub .400 ERA and 175+ K's get him to that amount if he does it every year over his 5 year deal.

[tdawg87]

One could argue that Garza is an "NL guy".

I would rather have Garza too, but the Angels need a Plan C and I think Maholm and Capuano are a good plan C to have.

Garza might take a deal like that and if so I would be fine with it but I wouldn't be shocked to see multiple teams offer more. In fact I could see him getting 5/80 guaranteed without incentives.

[Jim]

It's funny because my post was in no way negative whatsoever. If anything it's taking a positive outlook at other options.

 

It's only negative if you think Tanaka is the end-all be-all to the Angels' off-season and that the Angels have a 100% chance of getting him. Considering his screen name, that seems to be the case.

I can see how Tanaka thinks Tanaka is the end-all-be-all, not much of a surprise there. I don't see us getting him either.

I am in fear however that Jerry will go shopping in haste when Tanaka signs with the Mariners. And while Garza is a scary product, IMO, he is not nearly as scary as Capuano or Maholm.   

[Inside Pitch]

I can see how Tanaka thinks Tanaka is the end-all-be-all, not much of a surprise there. I don't see us getting him either.

I am in fear however that Jerry will go shopping in haste when Tanaka signs with the Mariners. And while Garza is a scary product, IMO, he is not nearly as scary as Capuano or Maholm.   

 

 

Problem with Garza is whoever signs him will have to pay as if he isn't a scary product.

 

Garza is a career 4.32 ERA pitcher in neutral parks.  He's has arm issues the last two years.  He was lit up in the AL despite pitching well IN Arlington last year.   Despite all this he may be in line for 15+ M per year for as many as 5 years.

 

I seriously cannot think of anything scarier than Garza at that price and years.

Edited January 10, 2014 by Inside Pitch

[floplag]

Of what is out there i agree with the premise, i cant help but feel a bit off deja-vu as its kinda what we did last years was go with a bag of peanuts and it didnt work out so well

Im not high on Tanaka or Garza if the price gets up where most think it will.. i do see the return on investment.

Im not high on any of the lesser tiered guys as there is a probability that there would be no return on any investment ala Blanton.

In my opinion we must get a true #3... thats what we need.  but we also dont need to pay ace money to get it.

I still think the best option is via trade, but thats just my opinion and would of course also depend on the trade parameters so thats purely theoretical.

[Halos of Anaheim]

20-1 odds are probably a little off. More than likely very off. I'd say we have a 15-10 (lets say 12.5) in 1 chance of signing him.