Why the Angels should avoid Tanaka

[floplag]

Nolasco is a 1.5 WAR pitcher who got 4/49.  Garza is certainly better thought of.  The fact that it's getting late in the off season has zero bearing relative to what it would normally mean to still be out there.  All the same people that wanted Garza from the beginning still do.  He's gonna be at 4/75 or 5/90.  His aav is going to be around 18mil for 4-5yrs.  I am not sure why people think he's gonna come at a bargain relative to everyone else all of a sudden. 

 

See i keep reading this but it also seems very clear he isnt going to get that or he would have already.  It isnt that your logic is bad as it isnt, i just dont think anyone is willing to pay him that.  the comparisons and such are valid, it just seems that if he was going to ge t that, if he was valued that hig, he would already be signed... just my 2 cents on that.

The only other possibility is that he prefers to be in a specific place, such as Ana, and is waiting for the pieces to fall together before making the call

 

i mean i know waiting for Tanaka to set the value but the same reasons everyone here states why Tanaka is better than Garza mean Tanaka really doesn't set Garza's value anyway.

Edited January 14, 2014 by floplag

[Docwaukee]

.

Fletcher said Garza would have signed already if offered a 5/75 mil contract. Fletcher thinks he will sign for an AAV around 14 mil

I think that's why he's waiting to see where Tanaka ends up which I think will be $20-22 aav.  Time will tell. 

[floplag]

or.. here is a late addition to the options....

 

IF we are talking about busting the luxury tax for the year anyway, why not completely bust it... sign Tanaka if possible AND sign Garza.  Adding both to what we have makes for a far more interesting rotation.  Wishful thinking im sure but still, if your going to pay the tax pay the tax either way making these moves, if that is really not a concern, then go all in.

 

With whats coming off after nest year it would balance out for '15 or pretty close i think, though i dont have the numbers handy and wanted to post this before i had time to look it up.

[Jeff Fletcher]

Nolasco is a 1.5 WAR pitcher who got 4/49.  Garza is certainly better thought of.  The fact that it's getting late in the off season has zero bearing relative to what it would normally mean to still be out there.  All the same people that wanted Garza from the beginning still do.  He's gonna be at 4/75 or 5/90.  His aav is going to be around 18mil for 4-5yrs.  I am not sure why people think he's gonna come at a bargain relative to everyone else all of a sudden. 

Because it's January 14?

 

And he and 12 other major league starters are still free agents?

 

Obviously the Nolasco deal was an outlier and has created a gap between what the players expect and what the pitchers want. That's why there are so many still unsigned.

[Chimi]

I think Nolasco got a deal when teams thought the pitchers were going to get way overpaid so he was offered a deal he couldn't pass up. I'm guessing the Twins are kicking themselves for not waiting now.

[Docwaukee]

See i keep reading this but it also seems very clear he isnt going to get that or he would have already.  It isnt that your logic is bad as it isnt, i just dont think anyone is willing to pay him that.  the comparisons and such are valid, it just seems that if he was going to ge t that, if he was valued that hig, he would already be signed... just my 2 cents on that.

The only other possibility is that he prefers to be in a specific place, such as Ana, and is waiting for the pieces to fall together before making the call

I personally think he's got the AAV he wants but is waiting for that 5th year at the same AAV and he thinks the Tanaka sweeps leftovers will give it to him. 

 

I think Ubaldo and maybe Santana have over played their hand because of their tie to compensation.  I am predicting a Lohse type deal for Ubaldo.  Garza is still the premier (if you can call it that) FA pitcher without compensation (generally valued at about 15mil) that is a fairly known quantity.  I think he'll at least get Anibal Sanchez money of 5/80 or if you have to take a year off it will be 4/72 with an option and a buyout. 

[Docwaukee]

Because it's January 14?

 

And he and 12 other major league starters are still free agents?

 

Obviously the Nolasco deal was an outlier and has created a gap between what the players expect and what the pitchers want. That's why there are so many still unsigned.

I just personally think the timing is less of a factor this offseason.  Tanaka has delayed everything by at least a month and once he signs, it will be business as usual. 

 

Also, how is Nolasco an outlier?  Hughes, Feldman, getting 8 and 10aav for 3 yrs.  Guys like Hudson and Colon getting 10-12 at their age for 2 years.  Kazmir?  Holy hell.  Guy doesn't pitch for 2 years, has a mediocre season with an outlier walk rate and get's 11mil aav for 2 years.  Vargas is more of an outlier in that he probably could have gotten more. 

[SoWhat]

I thought for sure Garza would get a contract close to what Anibal Sanchez got, since their numbers are extremely similar. If the Angels can get Garza at 4/56, I say do it.

Edited January 14, 2014 by SoWhat

[Jim]

Hey, I get it.  All are very gun shy in regards to taking on big contracts relative to how they've turned out.  Pujols is stiff wind from the DL and Hamilton is essentially a $25mil/yr platoon player. 

To date, you have a point. However, I feel you will have a difficult time defending this statement by seasons end. 

[Chimi]

I think a lot of those teams signed those guys at what they thought was the going rate for pitching at the time but as it gets closer to spring training, it's possible they over valued what they got. Garza is worth more than those guys, but at this point in the game, it doesn't mean he's going to get more.

[Jim]

FYI, if any team was going to give Garza 5/75 he'd have signed already.

I now believe he's looking at more like 3-4 years and 14ish per year, so 3/42 to 4/56. If he gets 3 it's likely got an option.

This

[Docwaukee]

FYI, if any team was going to give Garza 5/75 he'd have signed already.

I now believe he's looking at more like 3-4 years and 14ish per year, so 3/42 to 4/56. If he gets 3 it's likely got an option.

no one wants to give him that kind of money and that's why he's waiting.  But I contend that he will get it. 

 

Don't you think a whole mess of teams would be in if he only cost 7mil more over 4yrs relative to Nolasco?  Wouldn't that drive up the price? 

 

I think he's got 4/60 and 5/70 in his pocket. 

 

Hell, I would be ecstatic to get him for what you mentioned. 

[Torridd]

 

According to Michael C Jones of Yahoo Sports.

 

Key quotes:

 

Is Tanaka the answer?

In short, maybe, but it's not worth finding out the answer.

 

....

 

Yes, Tanaka could be a game-changer for a team that's set up to win now like the Angels, but if signing him turns out to be the wrong move, then the Halos will be 0-for-3 (after missing the playoffs in years in which they signed Pujols and Hamilton in 2012 and 2013) on big-name signings over the last three seasons.

 

That kind of risk-reward scenario is too much to take on for a team that's already swung for the fences and missed in a big way. Bringing in one player won't solve the depth issues that plagued the pitching staff. They need to get better across the board.

 

.....................................

 

I tend to agree with Jones. Its one thing if Tanaka was going to cost Weaver/Wilson money, but he's not. I just don't think its worth the risk, in the end.

 

I'd rather see them:

 

1. Sign a Chris Capuano or Paul Maholm type. Someone who won't break the bank but can provide solid #4-type innings and it won't be a major travesty if he fails, or is replaced by Skaggs or Santiago. Or see if AJ Burnett can be coaxed into a one-year deal, or even give that Yoon guy a shot. The point being, the main thing they need in the rotation is depth - another #4 type. Hope that one of Skaggs or Richards can step up as a true #3.
2. Bolster the bullpen with one more good reliever - Bailey, Betancourt, Mijares, maybe even Balfour a shot for a reduced rate. Or go after Chad Gaudin, who can start or be in the pen.
3. Save that money from Tanaka and spend it on Trout. After Opening Day, of course.

 

I disagree. You take your chances based on your information. If he's good as advertised, then roll the dice.

[LAAMike]

I am confused about Tanaka as he is reported as heading back to Japan without meeting with neither the Angels or the Dodgers.  Are these two teams no in the running? 

[Docwaukee]

I am confused about Tanaka as he is reported as heading back to Japan without meeting with neither the Angels or the Dodgers.  Are these two teams no in the running? 

apparently, he was actually supposed to fly to Chicago to meet with several teams besides the Angels and Dodgers yet he could only get to LA where those other teams met him for the meetings. 

[Angel Oracle]

I'm glad that JD didn't rush to sign a pitcher, like he did Blanton a year ago.

[Hubs]

I'm glad that JD didn't rush to sign a pitcher, like he did Blanton a year ago.

 

I'm not. I'd much rather have signed Dan Haren to the Dodgers contract amount than be where they are now.

[Jimmag]

Tanaka went back to Japan to finish the Lottery for which bank will hold his money.

[Brent Maguire]

If Garza was really looking for 3 years, I would be fine with that.

A 3/45 type of deal is something I could live with and it would be hard for that to turn into an albatross contract.

[fan_since79]

But there's a real chance that he'll be a dud, or at least mediocre. If that happens, this franchise is ****ed for the next half decade or more. They can't recover from the Dark Ages of 2010-2013 with three massive albatross contracts; two is already enough.

 

That's right. You can say Goodbye to Trout if that turns out to be the case.

[Mark68]

or.. here is a late addition to the options....

 

IF we are talking about busting the luxury tax for the year anyway, why not completely bust it... sign Tanaka if possible AND sign Garza.  Adding both to what we have makes for a far more interesting rotation.  Wishful thinking im sure but still, if your going to pay the tax pay the tax either way making these moves, if that is really not a concern, then go all in.

 

With whats coming off after nest year it would balance out for '15 or pretty close i think, though i dont have the numbers handy and wanted to post this before i had time to look it up.

If getting Tanaka puts us over the cap, it's for this year only, as Wells and Blanton come off after this season, which means Trout can be extended after opening day, Getting both Tanaka and Garza would be...problematic salary-wise.

[VariousCrap]

All the same people that wanted Garza from the beginning still do.  He's gonna be at 4/75 or 5/90.  His aav is going to be around 18mil for 4-5yrs.  I am not sure why people think he's gonna come at a bargain relative to everyone else all of a sudden. 

 

 

 

No way in hell does Garza get a deal that high.

[VariousCrap]

 I think he'll at least get Anibal Sanchez money of 5/80 or if you have to take a year off it will be 4/72 with an option and a buyout. 

 

 

 

No way does he get Sanchez money.

[Brent Maguire]

I'd say there's a good chance that Garza gets a deal that high. 

 

Not having a draft pick attached is going to make him a much more attractive option... after Tanaka signs of course.