Jeff Fletcher Predicts: Garza to Angels

[Blarg]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

 

Please, Jerry, consider my suggestions.

Why would he consider suggestions from a guy that has buyers remorse over his phone?

[Mark68]

Seriously don't get the dislike for Garza here.

He's made of glass, he's not getting any younger, and he's not going to get any better.

 

This is why I don't like him.

 

However, if he signs for 4/$55, I suppose I can live with that.

[Tavon Brown]

I was against Garza because of my man crush on Tanaka.  I felt Tanaka gave the Angels the best chance at a WS.  Now that T is gone.  Garza is the next best thing.  Yes he has had elbow problems.  Yes he struggled a bit on the Rangers.  Does he straight suck like Blanton?  No.   Could he help the Angels wins.  Short answer yes.  Will the Angels spend money on him?  Who the hell knows at this point.

 

I am 100% behind bringing in Garza.

[AngelsLakersFan]

I'm guessing the 69 games he missed in 2012 with a right elbow injury and the 84 games he missed in 2013 with a right shoulder injury would be the reason for the concern.

 

I'm not against signing Garza, especially at that money, but when guys have back to back injury filled seasons I usually recommend shying away. I'd never sign the guy beyond a year if there were any other options out there, and if you are a pessimist then you would argue that this team would be better off standing pat. 

 

The problem I see here is that the Angels are a legit #3 away from being serious contenders, and while Garza might be the only guy left who fits that mold, I wouldn't be surprised to see him rack up less than 250 innings with the Angels over a 4 year contract.

Edited January 22, 2014 by AngelsLakersFan

[Chuck]

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

 

How about say nothing and STFU?

[Chuck]

Give Garza 4 years, 55 million but load it up with all kinds of incentives if he pitches at least 190 innings per season.

[TroutAdell]

I think this is a crossroads year for the Angels. Sosh and Dipoto's jobs hang in the balance. Realistically, this team is not championship caliber. Signing Garza will not put them over the top. I would rather spend on another solid pen arm and sign a serviceable starter. The model for winning consistently is the Cardinals. Develop arms and use pitching depth to build the rest of the team. Long term contracts( with the exception of Trout) are a losing proposition. Suffer for a few years and build up the system. That is the true answer.

[Halos of Anaheim]

How about say nothing and STFU?

Mature. I'm glad you have no say in running our team.

[Scott34]

I think this is a crossroads year for the Angels. Sosh and Dipoto's jobs hang in the balance. Realistically, this team is not championship caliber. Signing Garza will not put them over the top. I would rather spend on another solid pen arm and sign a serviceable starter. The model for winning consistently is the Cardinals. Develop arms and use pitching depth to build the rest of the team. Long term contracts( with the exception of Trout) are a losing proposition. Suffer for a few years and build up the system. That is the true answer.

Best post I've read this week. Bravo.

[Chuck]

Mature. I'm glad you have no say in running our team.

 

If you're going to respond to my post that way, you're going to get some shit back.

 

I'm glad NONE of us are running the Angels, but if you shit on my opinion, expect such a response if you cannot disagree with facts or with a well thought out opinion of your own like others have in this thread.

 

I've watched Garza pitch enough to have my own opinion of him. The only thing that is cause for concern is his arm injuries. I say give him an incentive laden deal that if he reaches 190-200 IP per season, he gets a few million more per season.

[Halos of Anaheim]

I think this is a crossroads year for the Angels. Sosh and Dipoto's jobs hang in the balance. Realistically, this team is not championship caliber. Signing Garza will not put them over the top. I would rather spend on another solid pen arm and sign a serviceable starter. The model for winning consistently is the Cardinals. Develop arms and use pitching depth to build the rest of the team. Long term contracts( with the exception of Trout) are a losing proposition. Suffer for a few years and build up the system. That is the true answer.

It's what some of us have been saying for awhile, but nonetheless..great post summarizing the only right path the Angels can take from here on out. 

[Halos of Anaheim]

If you're going to respond to my post that way, you're going to get some shit back.

 

I'm glad NONE of us are running the Angels, but if you shit on my opinion, expect such a response if you cannot disagree with facts like others have in this thread.

I didn't shit on your opinion, shitting on your opinion would be me totally discrediting the false statements you made. ''Garza would be a perfect #3 on any team'' and ''He has the stuff to pitch like a #1/#2'' being the false statements I'm talking about.

 

I won't though, because it's been done many times and you clearly have your mind set already.

[Inside Pitch]

Give Garza 4 years, 55 million but load it up with all kinds of incentives if he pitches at least 190 innings per season.

 

I really wish teams would do more incentive based deals.   Stuff where if a guy performs really well he gets paid above the going rate for a pitcher of his caliber.  Pay him decently, but offer a guy a chance to make elite money and that may be enough of a carrot to get more out of him.

 

I know a situation like that may end up costing a team a bargain, but if the trade off is actual performance and the team's goals are winning, it seems like money well spent.

[Halo4life714]

I see we got some riveting discussion going on here. But my two cents are we should sign Garza especially at this 4 year 55 million deal if possible. What we need are consistent quality starts. And if you have a career 3.80 ERA thats pretty good these days. Add in Skaggs and Santiago potential and I think we would be in contention. The key here is quality starts are Garza would give us this.

[LightTheHalo]

The Angels have no choice but to try to win now. That's why they signed Pujols and Hamilton. You don't sign guys on the other side of 30 to enormous contracts in order to have them help you rebuild for a couple of seasons. 

 

Whether or not they have the pieces to be "championship caliber" is another debate, but they're not going to bide their time for a couple of seasons while they're paying Pujols and Hamilton $50M a year.

[VariousCrap]

I think Garza's market consists of one team and that's the Angels.

 

 

Maybe the Diamondbacks, but they won't go more than three years.

[DMVol]

The Angels have no choice but to try to win now. That's why they signed Pujols and Hamilton. You don't sign guys on the other side of 30 to enormous contracts in order to have them help you rebuild for a couple of seasons. 

 Whether or not they have the pieces to be "championship caliber" is another debate, but they're not going to bide their time for a couple of seasons while they're paying Pujols and Hamilton $50M a year.

+1....that's the reality, whether we like it or not...

[Marsaka]

The Angels have no choice but to try to win now. That's why they signed Pujols and Hamilton. You don't sign guys on the other side of 30 to enormous contracts in order to have them help you rebuild for a couple of seasons. 

 

Whether or not they have the pieces to be "championship caliber" is another debate, but they're not going to bide their time for a couple of seasons while they're paying Pujols and Hamilton $50M a year.

 

pujols and hamilton look like big flops though.  its a bad idea to compound their mistakes by bringing in more bad contracts and pray that all of sudden pujols and hamilton wont stink.

[Hamilton Noji]

i don't see why we can't be in contention. baseball is too random. but all in all, we are better than last year, and we have at least the talent on paper to compete.

 

weaver/wilson + garza/santiago/richards/skaggs is a heck of a lot better than hanson/vargas/blanton/williams although vargas was OK for us. 

hamilton/pujols should be better than last year

freese is better than alberto.

aybar/kendrick should be around the same

ianetta should be around the same

trout/conger/calhoun should be better

if ibanez gives us 750OPS that should minimize trumbo's loss

 

green/shuck/romine are decent off the bench.

 

frieri/smith/dlr/burnett is decent.

 

the only really huge question marks i think are

 

1. backend of bullpen (moran, morin, rapuda, jepsen, salas). could be lights out, could be blanton.

2. can santiago+skaggs+richards perform? very good chance at least 2/3 will be quality arms and give you 4/5 level pitching.

[VariousCrap]

I think this is a crossroads year for the Angels. Sosh and Dipoto's jobs hang in the balance. Realistically, this team is not championship caliber. Signing Garza will not put them over the top. I would rather spend on another solid pen arm and sign a serviceable starter. The model for winning consistently is the Cardinals. Develop arms and use pitching depth to build the rest of the team. Long term contracts( with the exception of Trout) are a losing proposition. Suffer for a few years and build up the system. That is the true answer.

 

 

 

Trout is not going to stick around for a team that is going to be suffering for the next few years.

[Scott34]

The Angels have no choice but to try to win now. That's why they signed Pujols and Hamilton. You don't sign guys on the other side of 30 to enormous contracts in order to have them help you rebuild for a couple of seasons. 

 

Whether or not they have the pieces to be "championship caliber" is another debate, but they're not going to bide their time for a couple of seasons while they're paying Pujols and Hamilton $50M a year.

 

I agree with this sentiment, but it's a slippery slope.

 

We have Pujols, Ham, etc, so now we sign Garza, next year we sign player X because we have Pujols, Ham, Garza, 2015 we sign player Y because we have Garza, player X, etc.  It's an unhealthy way to run an organization.

[VariousCrap]

I'd offer Garza:  3/45 with a fourth year team option of 15 million.  That gives him the potential of making 60 million over the next four years (which is the most he'll get) and it gives the Angels the option to only have him for 3 years if he has issues.

Edited January 22, 2014 by Jim B

[Brent Maguire]

I agree with this sentiment, but it's a slippery slope.

We have Pujols, Ham, etc, so now we sign Garza, next year we sign player X because we have Pujols, Ham, Garza, 2015 we sign player Y because we have Garza, player X, etc. It's an unhealthy way to run an organization.

Yup.

Continuing to make bad contracts to make up for other bad contracts seems like a bad idea. That's why getting someone like Capuano works. You do that's a hefty commitment with him.

[eligrba]

I would sign Garza just to have someone on the field with some emotions once every five days.  Watching the Los Angeles Lollygagers last year was more painful than watching Blanton.

[Glen]

Trout is not going to stick around for a team that is going to be suffering for the next few years.

 

 

You have no way of knowing that.