Angelsjunky

Trumbo is finishing up his third full season, all of which are very similar. Check out his fWAR: 2.1, 2.2, 1.9. Its probably safe to say that his 1.9 fWAR this year will increase a bit to be right there with 2011 and '12.
 
Chances are he's not getting much better - he's just been too consistent. His walk rate has improved slightly each year, but at the expense of striking out more. His BABIP is down this year at .272 from .316 last year, but it was .274 in 2011 so it could be that this year is more indicative of his true talent level than last.
 
If we want to be a bit optimistic we can hope that his modest defensive gains will remain and his BABIP will stabilize around .300. That means next year he could hit around .260/.320/.500 with 35 HR, which with his averagish defense would be good for about 3 fWAR, I think. I think that's the best we can reasonably hope for, although it is certainly possible that he has a career year at some point and hits .280 with 40 HR and a 4-5 fWAR. I wouldn't expect that to happen more than once, though. .260/.800 seems more indicative of an optimized true talent level.
 
Calhoun, on the other hand, seems capable of hitting about .280/.350/.450 with 15-20 HR as a major leaguer - or that would be my guess. If his defense is average he should be a 3-4 fWAR player, and thus better than Trumbo.
 
Given that Peter Bourjos likely won't be traded because of declined trade value, it seems probably that one of Trumbo and Calhoun get traded, possibly along with Howie Kendrick. I'd much rather see Trumbo go as I think he has a bit more trade value - those 90+ HR over the last three years are enticing - but at the same time I think Calhoun will be a bit better.

Me agree.
 
Short fragment sentences.
 
The bomb are.

That's what my choice would be. That said, I don't necessarily see Bourjos on the Angels long-term. If Cron, Grichuk or even Borenstein hit well then Bourjos can be traded after next year and Calhoun inserted in LF, with Trout back in CF.

I think AJ was the first to say exactly what I was looking for in this thread.  Is Trumbo more valuable than Calhoun?  Because for measuring purposes, Kole Calhoun would effectively be considered his replacement given that he plays 1B and the corner OF.  You also have to consider the circumstances.  How valuable are HR's to this team vs. OBP?  
 
If every player had a high OBP but only moderate power, then Calhoun would hold practically no value.  Conversely, if every player on the team was a power hitter with a low OBP then Trumbo would hold little value.  So how do these guys measure up with comparison to their team?  Well in terms of power, the Angels have Hamilton, Pujols and Trout.  In terms of OBP the Angels have Trout and Iannetta.
 
BA - Calhoun would likely hit 20-30 points higher in any given season.
OBP - Calhoun's OBP would be 50 points higher on average. 
HR's - Trumbo should hit 20 more HR's yearly.
SB - Calhoun should take 5-10 extra bases a year. 
Defense - Despite the results lately, Calhoun is a better defender in the OF than Trumbo while Trumbo's better at 1B. 
 
Finally, there are two more aspects to consider.  1-If Trumbo's the better defender at 1B, do we have a replacement?  Yes, Pujols or Calhoun.  2- Monetary consideration.  Calhoun will be playing for the league minimum for another two years.  Over the next two years, you can expect Trumbo to earn at least 7 million.  
 
In conclusion, I think Calhoun is a slightly more valuable player given the climate of the Angels and his skill set. Not only does he contribute in more aspects, the idea that Trumbo's DH and backup corner OF limits his value on a team that has Pujols and Hamilton, both of whom will need considerable time at DH. 

Trumbo is finishing up his third full season, all of which are very similar. Check out his fWAR: 2.1, 2.2, 1.9. Its probably safe to say that his 1.9 fWAR this year will increase a bit to be right there with 2011 and '12.
 
Chances are he's not getting much better - he's just been too consistent. His walk rate has improved slightly each year, but at the expense of striking out more. His BABIP is down this year at .272 from .316 last year, but it was .274 in 2011 so it could be that this year is more indicative of his true talent level than last.
 
If we want to be a bit optimistic we can hope that his modest defensive gains will remain and his BABIP will stabilize around .300. That means next year he could hit around .260/.320/.500 with 35 HR, which with his averagish defense would be good for about 3 fWAR, I think. I think that's the best we can reasonably hope for, although it is certainly possible that he has a career year at some point and hits .280 with 40 HR and a 4-5 fWAR. I wouldn't expect that to happen more than once, though. .260/.800 seems more indicative of an optimized true talent level.
 
Calhoun, on the other hand, seems capable of hitting about .280/.350/.450 with 15-20 HR as a major leaguer - or that would be my guess. If his defense is average he should be a 3-4 fWAR player, and thus better than Trumbo.
 
Given that Peter Bourjos likely won't be traded because of declined trade value, it seems probably that one of Trumbo and Calhoun get traded, possibly along with Howie Kendrick. I'd much rather see Trumbo go as I think he has a bit more trade value - those 90+ HR over the last three years are enticing - but at the same time I think Calhoun will be a bit better.

Trumbo is finishing up his third full season, all of which are very similar. Check out his fWAR: 2.1, 2.2, 1.9. Its probably safe to say that his 1.9 fWAR this year will increase a bit to be right there with 2011 and '12.
 
Chances are he's not getting much better - he's just been too consistent. His walk rate has improved slightly each year, but at the expense of striking out more. His BABIP is down this year at .272 from .316 last year, but it was .274 in 2011 so it could be that this year is more indicative of his true talent level than last.
 
If we want to be a bit optimistic we can hope that his modest defensive gains will remain and his BABIP will stabilize around .300. That means next year he could hit around .260/.320/.500 with 35 HR, which with his averagish defense would be good for about 3 fWAR, I think. I think that's the best we can reasonably hope for, although it is certainly possible that he has a career year at some point and hits .280 with 40 HR and a 4-5 fWAR. I wouldn't expect that to happen more than once, though. .260/.800 seems more indicative of an optimized true talent level.
 
Calhoun, on the other hand, seems capable of hitting about .280/.350/.450 with 15-20 HR as a major leaguer - or that would be my guess. If his defense is average he should be a 3-4 fWAR player, and thus better than Trumbo.
 
Given that Peter Bourjos likely won't be traded because of declined trade value, it seems probably that one of Trumbo and Calhoun get traded, possibly along with Howie Kendrick. I'd much rather see Trumbo go as I think he has a bit more trade value - those 90+ HR over the last three years are enticing - but at the same time I think Calhoun will be a bit better.

Trumbo is finishing up his third full season, all of which are very similar. Check out his fWAR: 2.1, 2.2, 1.9. Its probably safe to say that his 1.9 fWAR this year will increase a bit to be right there with 2011 and '12.
 
Chances are he's not getting much better - he's just been too consistent. His walk rate has improved slightly each year, but at the expense of striking out more. His BABIP is down this year at .272 from .316 last year, but it was .274 in 2011 so it could be that this year is more indicative of his true talent level than last.
 
If we want to be a bit optimistic we can hope that his modest defensive gains will remain and his BABIP will stabilize around .300. That means next year he could hit around .260/.320/.500 with 35 HR, which with his averagish defense would be good for about 3 fWAR, I think. I think that's the best we can reasonably hope for, although it is certainly possible that he has a career year at some point and hits .280 with 40 HR and a 4-5 fWAR. I wouldn't expect that to happen more than once, though. .260/.800 seems more indicative of an optimized true talent level.
 
Calhoun, on the other hand, seems capable of hitting about .280/.350/.450 with 15-20 HR as a major leaguer - or that would be my guess. If his defense is average he should be a 3-4 fWAR player, and thus better than Trumbo.
 
Given that Peter Bourjos likely won't be traded because of declined trade value, it seems probably that one of Trumbo and Calhoun get traded, possibly along with Howie Kendrick. I'd much rather see Trumbo go as I think he has a bit more trade value - those 90+ HR over the last three years are enticing - but at the same time I think Calhoun will be a bit better.

Trumbo isn't far from his career averages so I don't know why improvement would be considered a "rebound."

Me agree.
 
Short fragment sentences.
 
The bomb are.

Well said, storm. I mean, I love the idea of getting a #5 draft pick, but I'd rather see the team play to its potential which is a much stronger building block for next year. By winning games in September, the team is proving to itself that it can win.
 
The problem with the opposing viewpoint is that it ignores the aspect of morale and human psychology. I want to see the guys enjoy playing baseball and its much more fun winning than losing. I'd bed money that not a single player is saying "Man, we need to stop winning because we're going to miss out on a top 10 draft pick." They're more likely saying "THIS is how winning feels like, I remember now, and I love it - I want to do more!"

Trumbo isn't far from his career averages so I don't know why improvement would be considered a "rebound."

Well said, storm. I mean, I love the idea of getting a #5 draft pick, but I'd rather see the team play to its potential which is a much stronger building block for next year. By winning games in September, the team is proving to itself that it can win.
 
The problem with the opposing viewpoint is that it ignores the aspect of morale and human psychology. I want to see the guys enjoy playing baseball and its much more fun winning than losing. I'd bed money that not a single player is saying "Man, we need to stop winning because we're going to miss out on a top 10 draft pick." They're more likely saying "THIS is how winning feels like, I remember now, and I love it - I want to do more!"

Well said, storm. I mean, I love the idea of getting a #5 draft pick, but I'd rather see the team play to its potential which is a much stronger building block for next year. By winning games in September, the team is proving to itself that it can win.
 
The problem with the opposing viewpoint is that it ignores the aspect of morale and human psychology. I want to see the guys enjoy playing baseball and its much more fun winning than losing. I'd bed money that not a single player is saying "Man, we need to stop winning because we're going to miss out on a top 10 draft pick." They're more likely saying "THIS is how winning feels like, I remember now, and I love it - I want to do more!"

Walks are a false stat. He is only hitting .218 in high leverage situations this year per Fangraphs.
Trade him for pitching and sign a real professional hitter like Michael Young. Or trade him for somebody with is more Clutch this year, like Ryan Doumit or Brian Dozier.

Can we get off this?  This topic has been beaten to death!
 
This isn't the NBA.  We are not going to draft anyone who going to come in immediately and turn the franchise around.  Therefore, losing for a "better pick" is not winning like many of you repeatedly stated on this board.  It would nice to get a protected pick, but that is about it.  Remember, Trout wasn't drafted in the top 10.  Neither was Pujols.  Great baseball players don't necessarily come in the top 10 of the draft.  
 
All losing does is build on the culture of "losing".  It makes "losing acceptable" and for a winner, it isn't acceptable.  
 
Losing deliberately means.....YOUR A LOSER!

I hate to be a wet blanket, but its important to remember that these games are as important as a solo home run in the 9th inning down by 10 runs. They look impressive and are fun, but they have no level of importance to them.
 
There's a term that isn't used much today for a player who tends to pad their stats with those sorts of meaningless home runs: a hot dog. The Angels are hot-dogging it right now.
 
The point for me is: I'm not impressed, nor does it make me more hopeful for next year. I was already hopeful for next year, but the recent play doesn't impact that at all because the games are meaningless.

I hate to be a wet blanket, but its important to remember that these games are as important as a solo home run in the 9th inning down by 10 runs. They look impressive and are fun, but they have no level of importance to them.
 
There's a term that isn't used much today for a player who tends to pad their stats with those sorts of meaningless home runs: a hot dog. The Angels are hot-dogging it right now.
 
The point for me is: I'm not impressed, nor does it make me more hopeful for next year. I was already hopeful for next year, but the recent play doesn't impact that at all because the games are meaningless.

10/$120M is a joke. As tdawg said, it starts with 10/$200M and really goes up as high as it needs to. I think it ends up being something like 10 years, $200-250 million.

10/$120M is a joke. As tdawg said, it starts with 10/$200M and really goes up as high as it needs to. I think it ends up being something like 10 years, $200-250 million.

CaliAngel, the problem is that August 14 was not a "fluke" - or at least its a fluke that happened two years in a row. Last year he had not one but two similarly terrible starts (May 13 and August 17) and it might just be that Jered is prone to have a terrible start every once in a while. If its only once or twice a year I can live with that.
 
As for whether or not Jered is an "ace," I'm probably repeating myself but that depends upon what we mean by "ace." If we define an ace as "someone as good as Clayton Kershaw" then no, Jered is not an ace - but then he never was, nor is almost anyone else in baseball.
 
If we define an ace as "a #1-2 starter who has an outside chance at Cy Young contention every few years" then Weaver fits the bill. I don't think he's one of the ten or so best starters in baseball anymore, but he's probably one of the twenty best and would be the best or second best starter on most major league teams.

The thing I like about Calhoun is that he's more than the sum of his parts. He's average to above average at just about everything, but not great at anything. He could end up hitting .280 with 15-20 HR, 60+ walks, 15 SB, play good defense at a few position, and be a 4-5 WAR player.
 
I'd rather trade Trumbo then Bourjos then Calhoun, not because I think Calhoun is better than Bourjos, or Bourjos is better than Trumbo, but because of perceived value vs. actual value. Right now Calhoun doesn't have the perceived value of Trumbo or Bourjos, but his actual value is similar.
 
Who knows what the offseason will bring, but it seems likely that at least one of the three will be traded, maybe even two. But one should be enough, and in my mind it should be either Trumbo or Bourjos both of whom could be the center piece in a package for a #2-3 starter.

The thing I like about Calhoun is that he's more than the sum of his parts. He's average to above average at just about everything, but not great at anything. He could end up hitting .280 with 15-20 HR, 60+ walks, 15 SB, play good defense at a few position, and be a 4-5 WAR player.
 
I'd rather trade Trumbo then Bourjos then Calhoun, not because I think Calhoun is better than Bourjos, or Bourjos is better than Trumbo, but because of perceived value vs. actual value. Right now Calhoun doesn't have the perceived value of Trumbo or Bourjos, but his actual value is similar.
 
Who knows what the offseason will bring, but it seems likely that at least one of the three will be traded, maybe even two. But one should be enough, and in my mind it should be either Trumbo or Bourjos both of whom could be the center piece in a package for a #2-3 starter.

Looks like my fears from last November were prescient.
 
A couple quotes:
 
"Dipoto is now in the situation where he must re-sign Greinke. If he doesn't, he's going to be scrambling all offseason to sign and/or trade for at least one starter, probably two - and the Angels farm system is already depleted, easily in the bottom third in all of baseball."
 
"One could envision a worst-case-scenario in 2013 where Greinke signs elsewhere and neither Pujols or Wilson have better years."
 
This happened. Greinke is gone, Wilson has had a similiar, maybe slightly better year, and Pujols was quite a bit worse.
 
"He also has to figure out what to do with Vernon Wells and the $42 million owed him – whether to continue to block better, younger players in Peter Bourjos and Kole Calhoun, or see if he can find someway to at least take a few million off what’s owed in a trade."
 
As to the last, Dipoto did better than expected - but the problem is that he replaced one problem (Wells) with another (Hamilton).
 
"...what moves he makes over the next month or two will determine not only the fate of the Angels next year, but perhaps his own long-term fate as the Angels GM. If I’m Arte Moreno I wouldn’t give up on Dipoto yet – far from it – but I wouldn't tolerate a second disappointing year in a row, not with the money that Dipoto has had to play with."
 
Things turned out worse than anyone thought, so let's not be surprised if this comes to pass. Of course Arte could show previously un-seen self-awareness and realize that his splurges are part of the problem.
 

Just don't tell the Republicans this - they think its only under Obama.

Translation: Hamilton has a bad case of the sucks.