Jeff Fletcher Predicts: Garza to Angels

[Marsaka]

Oh I'm not saying I did, just in general. There seems to be no interest or distaste in this guy, when in reality his stuff is better than anyone in our current rotation and he's got 7 straight years of a sub 4.00 ERA. That's a major accomplishment as a SP IMO. Someone I'd love to slide into our #3 spot.

 

his stuff is lights outs? lol

 

1.  his career 3.84 era is nothing close to a lights out pitcher.

2.  when he got traded to texas he had a very mediocre 4.38 era, even the astros lit him up.

3.  most of those years were in the weak pitcher friendly NL

4.  the angels have a history of taking bad contracts and getting poor results

5.  the angels need more than just garza to make the playoffs.

[Marsaka]

I am with Chuck on this one. At that price, I seriously don't get the negativity towards signing Garza.

 

ok heres a few reasons

 

1. burnett

2. madson

3. hamilton

4. pujols

5. blanton

6. hanson

[gurn67]

ok heres a few reasons

 

1. burnett

2. madson

3. hamilton

4. pujols

5. blanton

6. hanson

 

Lucky number seven!!!

[Marsaka]

Oh I'm not saying I did, just in general. There seems to be no interest or distaste in this guy

 

 

i dont understand the love affair for this guy.  hes a very average pitcher with arm troubles the last 2 years.  the last thing the angels need is to pay another pitcher money to sit at home on his couch like they did with burnett, madson, hanson, and vargas.

[Stradling]

his stuff is lights outs? lol

1. his career 3.84 era is nothing close to a lights out pitcher.

2. when he got traded to texas he had a very mediocre 4.38 era, even the astros lit him up.

3. most of those years were in the weak pitcher friendly NL

4. the angels have a history of taking bad contracts and getting poor results

5. the angels need more than just garza to make the playoffs.

Actually most of those years were in the AL East, probably the best division in baseball at the time.

[bloodbrother]

Also one of the most difficult to pitch in because of all the good offenses + great hitters parks(Baltimore, Boston, New York, Toronto)

 

In Anaheim, it'll definitely help him. I don't mind him at 4yr/$50-$60 mill. If they get him for that, or even for one less year at 3(wishful thinking but who knows) then it becomes a very reasonable and safe contract

 

 

I just know with each start I'll be worrying about his elbow holding up. The warning signs are there and I can't help but shake the thought that he'll be having to get TJ surgery at some point

[Stradling]

his stuff is lights outs? lol

1. his career 3.84 era is nothing close to a lights out pitcher.

2. when he got traded to texas he had a very mediocre 4.38 era, even the astros lit him up.

3. most of those years were in the weak pitcher friendly NL

4. the angels have a history of taking bad contracts and getting poor results

5. the angels need more than just garza to make the playoffs.

He also pitched in Wrigley, a hitters park. They also played against the Cardinals, and Reds 19 times a year, both of whom are very good offensive teams.

[Inside Pitch]

7 straight years with a sub 4.00 ERA. You cannot bring up W/L when talking about a player's value.

 

His stuff is lights out and a legit #2 when everything is working, plus he's still fairly young as pitchers go.

 

 

You can't use ERA and ignore park effects either.    

 

Matt Garza owes as much to the parks he played in and the defenses he had behind as he does to anything he does on his own.  His neutral park ERA is over 4.30.   That doesn't sound awful but the AL average ERA last year was 3.99, for SPs it was 4.17.   

 

You talk up his stuff but, the rate stats he's put up are in line with those of Phil Hughes who you thought was complete garbage.  If your argument is that his "stuff" is that much better what are you basing it on... the pitch effects data doesn't really support that opinion -- on average they sit about 0.5 MPH apart across the board. 

 

Let's pretend it goes beyond the velocity... if his stuff is so much better then why is it the rates are so similar?

 

K/9 -- Garza 7.62, Hughes 7.56

BB/9 -- Garza 2.99, Hughes 2.82

HR/9 -- Garza 1.03, Hughes 1.29 (think the parks impacted these at all?)

 

Career road ERA - Garza 4.32, Hughes 4.10. (entire career in the AL East)

 

I saw Hughes as nothing better than a possible league average pitcher away from Yankee Stadium.  When you consider how favorably his numbers compare to those of Garza and how he's been a better neutral park pitcher then it's really not that difficult to see Garza as overrated.  He's good, he's just not as good those ERA's would make one believe and he's definitely not the pitcher Anibal Sanchez is.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that Garza isn't any better than Hughes, he's shown himself capable of going deeper in games and that has some real value, I just don't believe the gap is wide enough to warrant the massive difference in dollars and the recent injury trouble is worrisome.

 

I'd likely be less wary of him if not for all the missed time.  4/55 wouldn't be horrible though.  If they can do that - great.  

Edited January 22, 2014 by Inside Pitch

[Marsaka]

Also one of the most difficult to pitch in because of all the good offenses + great hitters parks(Baltimore, Boston, New York, Toronto)

 

In Anaheim, it'll definitely help him. I don't mind him at 4yr/$50-$60 mill. If they get him for that, or even for one less year at 3(wishful thinking but who knows) then it becomes a very reasonable and safe contract

 

 

 

he was in the al east 4 years ago,  it's silly to assume there wont be any regression.  and after people claimed pitching in anaheim would help blanton, im really surprised you would say that.

[bloodbrother]

blanton has never shown to be anywhere near Garza, performance wise. He simply sucks and his stuff sucks. Garza at least has a good fastball/slider combo and a lot more success under his belt than Blanton ever has

 

I'm not fond of the guy and would rather they just sign somebody like Capuano to a cheap deal(and then spend on one of the better FA arms next winter), but I don't expect the Halos to do that because jobs are on the line and they need to win now. I'm preparing myself for the team signing Garza and when they do I hope it's not for more than 4yrs/$60 mill

Edited January 22, 2014 by bloodbrother

[Inside Pitch]

What would Capuano likely be signed for, compared to what Garza likely gets? 

 

 

He's been reportedly looking for two years and 12 mil.

[Brent Maguire]

I could live with 4/55. I would rather wait until next year to get a starting pitcher like Bailey but it's not terrible if we can get Garza on that deal.

 

I understand that the team really needs to win now with the window closing on Hamilton, Pujols, Weaver, etc. so getting Garza definitely helps the team next year. 

 

Personally, I would like to see Capuano signed on a 2 year deal, sign Balfour and grab a starter in next year's class. I don't think Capuano would be that much worse and obviously he won't cost as much and you don't have to commit to him long term. 

[Inside Pitch]

I could live with 4/55. I would rather wait until next year to get a starting pitcher like Bailey but it's not terrible if we can get Garza on that deal.

 

I understand that the team really needs to win now with the window closing on Hamilton, Pujols, Weaver, etc. so getting Garza definitely helps the team next year. 

 

Personally, I would like to see Capuano signed on a 2 year deal, sign Balfour and grab a starter in next year's class. I don't think Capuano would be that much worse and obviously he won't cost as much and you don't have to commit to him long term. 

 

I'm not advocating signing Garza at 4/55 or anything, but the risk in waiting on a guy to get to FA is that his current team will pony up and sign him.  

 

Given what we just saw with Tanaka at 7/155 plus 20M....  Teams may really reconsider whether or not they will let a pitcher test FA...

[fan_since79]

He's been reportedly looking for two years and 12 mil.

 

That's a steal. Capuano would make a very decent #4 starter.

[Scott34]

Please no. Please.

[Angel Oracle]

Garza before 2012 = true #3 starter.

Garza after injury wracked 2012/2013 = too many ????

 

Count me in the Capuano before Garza camp.

Edited January 22, 2014 by Angel Oracle

[Scott34]

Capuano, Baker, Yoon, Hammel please. Much wiser investments.

[Halos of Anaheim]

Capuano, Baker, Yoon, Hammel please. Much wiser investments.

For depth, right? You realize none of these guys are going to give us anything better than #5..and POSSIBLY #4 production? Just making sure you aren't expecting anything more than what they are. There's nothing wrong with depth, but you keep rattling off these guys names in all these threads and I don't know what you're expecting when you do it.

Edited January 22, 2014 by Halos of Anaheim

[Scott34]

For depth, right? You realize none of these guys are going to give us anything better than #5..and POSSIBLY #4 production? Just making sure you aren't expecting anything more than what they are. There's nothing wrong with depth, but you keep rattling off these guys names in all these threads and I don't know what you're expecting when you do it.

That's the point of adding another starter.. Garza just isn't the answer. His arm is dust, he's on the wrong side of 30, and to be frank, his stuff isn't that great anymore.

There isn't a different maker on the market. Sign a depth guy and hope that Skaggs is ready or Mulder pulls a miracle.

[Halos of Anaheim]

That's the point of adding another starter.. Garza just isn't the answer. His arm is dust, he's on the wrong side of 30, and to be frank, his stuff isn't that great anymore.

There isn't a different maker on the market. Sign a depth guy and hope that Skaggs is ready or Mulder pulls a miracle.

I totally agree with you, I don't want Garza either and I think we're better off signing a depth guy for 1/2 years and going after a better starting pitcher next year for around the same AAV that we'd get for Garza (probably slightly more AAV and 1-2 more years, but it would be worth it). I was just curious of what you were expecting out of those guys since you're always mentioning them.

Edited January 22, 2014 by Halos of Anaheim

[Tavon Brown]

That's the point of adding another starter.. Garza just isn't the answer. His arm is dust, he's on the wrong side of 30, and to be frank, his stuff isn't that great anymore.

There isn't a different maker on the market. Sign a depth guy and hope that Skaggs is ready or Mulder pulls a miracle.

Then we are rolling into Spring Training as is.  Hope for the best.  I hear you.  I still love this team.  I am not happy.  But Arte I understand.  Enough money was spent.  I understand.

[nando714]

Capuano, Baker, Yoon, Hammel please. Much wiser investments.

Yuck.

Ya that's pretty much standing pat

[Chuck]

i dont understand the love affair for this guy.  hes a very average pitcher with arm troubles the last 2 years.  the last thing the angels need is to pay another pitcher money to sit at home on his couch like they did with burnett, madson, hanson, and vargas.

 

You're Straight Trollin'

 

If you don't think Garza has lights out stuff, you've never seen him pitch. He's the perfect #3 on any team, but has the stuff to pitch like a #1/#2 at any given time.

[Scott34]

Also: I'm totally fine with dealing Kendrick if any team wants him.

[Halos of Anaheim]

You're Straight Trollin'

 

If you don't think Garza has lights out stuff, you've never seen him pitch. He's the perfect #3 on any team, but has the stuff to pitch like a #1/#2 at any given time.

WOW. This post..I don't know what to say.