ettin

I think the subject of Kendrick's value is an interesting one and I'd like to get more input about it. In my projection I'm seeing him at about 3.4 WAR in 2014 and 2.90 in 2015, when he becomes a free agent. His WAR projection for 2016 is about 2.4. A couple of things to explain my reasoning: 3.4 WAR out of the 2nd base position in the first year has a bit of added value in my opinion (if you believe my number). Also when Howie's contract is up it is quite likely that he will receive a Qualifying Offer (which will be close to $16 million at that time). The QO would net the Blue Jays a compensatory draft pick after the 1st round. This draft pick has definite value in my opinion. Considering that Howie's contract is on the team-friendly side I pegged his rough surplus value, based on WAR and adjustments for the scarcity of a 3+WAR player (2014 only) and QO, at about $23 million. I guess what I am saying is that people look at Howie and say "meh" or "We can't trade him!" or something in between but I feel that he is an underappreciated player in terms of overall value and that is why I put him at what he's at. There is a fine line here. In my hypothetical the Jays are giving up one year of a closer (relievers are really not worth much period) and getting rid of a potential non-tender (Arencibia) and four prospects, two of which are projected relievers. Really the value that they are losing lies mainly with the two top pitching prospects. In return they are getting two, controlable MLB players plus another reliever to replace the one they lost (Carreno). To be honest Cory when I was doing this evaluation I initially thought the same thing as you but then I really looked closer. Yes they are losing a lot of names but most of them are not impactful ones except for Sanchez and Stroman (and Janssen too probably but he was/is a short-timer on their team anyway). Edit: Also one other thing to consider is the Jay's window of contention. They pushed all in last year and they still have most of those pieces for the next 2 years. Now is a time that they need to act and adding Howie and Iannetta will give them a chance to succeed in 2014. That may be worth the loss of Sanchez and Stroman.

I believe it has more to do with his 15.19 K/9 rate and 2.83 FIP in the AFL. He had some bad luck with the long ball which inflated his ERA. Take it all with a grain of salt though as the sample size is pretty small. However in comparison to others in the AFL his regressed numbers still stand out: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/increasingly-relevant-stat-report-on-the-arizona-fall-league/ Scroll down to the AFL pitchers list.

I don't know what all the fuss is about, to be honest. A platoon at 2nd is probably the more likely occurence between the three of Lindsey, Green, and Field. You can get improved production with a properly managed platoon. Also I am higher on Field. He has the ability to get on base and is formerly a shortstop who could probably provide average or better defense.

I'm going to go pour myself a Milk and Pepsi as this unfolds.

"Don't be fooled by the balls that I caught! I'm still! I'm still Peter on the block! Used to catch a little now a catch a lot! But I still know where I came from!"

The funnier thing is that they are both controllable for three more years making this a pretty straight across the board trade. Cashner and Trumbo's WAR last year were basically identical.

CS.com?

That's why I like you Doc, 60% of the time you are right all the time.

Seriously though that is a racist, hate-filled group!

The next morning there was a report on the St. Louis morning news that local sales of Kolt 45 plummeted overnight.

Although this will start a flame war, you are selling low on Peter Bourjos in that scenario. Of course Gallardo would be nice to pick up but I would think Trumbo and Iannetta would more likely get that done than by throwing in Peter too.

Nice thanks for sharing it!

And thus I used the term ML ready. It is a technical term but should be easy enough to decipher. The point is that we would not be trading any current starting position players as a rebuilding effort. It only makes sense if it's for a pitcher that helps in 2014. No need for the sarcasm. Just because you work at Boeing doesn't make you a know-it-all (I think the Dreamliner proves that). Your first sentence contradicts your second sentence. In the first one you said don't trade our MLB players for prospects and then in the second you used the words ML Ready. The first leads one to believe you don't want to trade our starters for prospects period, which makes the second sentence read that you want established MLB players. And again exclusively going after existing MLB talent will cost us much more than going after near-MLB ready prospects. Perhaps it is a mix of the two. Sign Vargas and Tanaka and trade for 2-3 AA/AAA prospects.

If the Angels suspect that Hanson's health is in question then yes definitely non-tender him. HOWEVER, if he seems healthy enough, $3.9 million for a back-end starter would probably intrigue some other teams in trade. If Arte is breaking the bank open then, only if he is healthy, would I even think about putting him in the 5th spot of the rotation (or alternatively as a long-relief guy or even turning him into a full time reliever). The same is true of Jepsen, as there are several teams that would take a flier on a 96-mph fastball that can be controlled for 2014 and maybe 2015. Trading Jepsen is best in my mind as I don't feel he has the grit to do closer/late-inning work. I feel the same way you do about him AO. Gutierrez is a toss-up but he hasn't impressed me that much. Unless Nelson is our 3B then non-tender him.

Unfortunately my company doesn't allow me to access Google docs..... much sadness.

So you would rather take the route of trying to acquire, as an example, one year of Max Scherzer, for three years of Erick Aybar (hypothetical but they actually have about the same total value over their respective controllable years)? Or alternatively maybe it is four years of Edwin Jackson plus some cash for Erick Aybar (again hypothetical but close to their relative values)? My point is that if we really want someone good we might not only have to give up Kendrick or Aybar or Trumbo, et. al. but possibly more if they are really good and more importantly controllable over more than one year. I disagree with the idea that we shouldn't move Kendrick and the rest for good quality pitching prospects. Pitchers like Matt Harvey, Gerrit Cole, Danny Salazar, Corey Kluber, et. al. were very recently just prospects yet they are now considered high-caliber MLB pitchers that will be mainstays in their respective teams rotations for the next several years. Certainly there is some risk built into acquiring prospects but the closer they are to the big leagues (AA/AAA), the more that risk is mitigated. More importantly those players are cost-controlled and can be kept for multiple seasons, unlike a Scherzer-type pitcher. Don't get me wrong I'd love to have an experienced, high-caliber MLB pitcher but they aren't readily available at this time (scarcity) and because of that they are commanding high prices over very short controllable time spans (Greinke, Garza, et. al.) whether it is in the form of MLB players or MiLB prospects. The only real source and chance of getting more than one good future pitcher is through acquiring multiple prospects.

Well my real thought wopphil came when I saw the Lincecum signing and it made me think of Williams and I thought let me put them side by side because I was really trying to make a point about Williams value more so than a real blind comparison. My bad I suppose but at least the conversation has gone partially in the direction I really intended it to go.

Sorry tdawg I was trying to focus more on the value aspect more so than a direct comparison of career stats. More of the "what have you done for me lately" perspective. My real point, that gotbeer said, is that Williams provides us with starting pitching depth while working out of the long relief role which is valuable on a team that really needs to build more depth. At $3.5 million (or as gotbeer suggested a 3 yr/$10 million contract extension) I think he provides solid value, especially when you consider the scarcity of starting pitching on the market right now. Yes Lincecum is a former Cy Young who had a down season but he just commanded a pretty hefty contract extension. Part of that overpay has to do with the scarcity of pitching and part of it has to do with the fact that the Giants are only committed to Timmy for two years (they didn't have to commit to a longer term contract which has value too).

Okay now that you have given away the answer, Williams is still under arbitration control for next season. He'll probably make about $3.5 million making him a value-asset in my opinion. The other player is of course Tim Lincecum. I merely wanted to point out a case of relative value. Lincecum has more upside than Williams, especially if he recaptures his previous Cy Young glory, but looking at their 2013 numbers side by side you have to think that the Angels will retain Williams in at least a long-relief role as he can insert into the rotation easily if there are injuries without sacrificing too much quality.

Here's another one for you guys, I'll answer it later today: Player A: 8.79 K/9, 3.46 BB/9, 4.37 ERA, 1.32 WHIP, 3.74 FIP, 3.56 xFIP, 3.75 SIERA Player B: 5.69 K/9, 2.92 BB/9, 4.57 ERA, 1.39 WHIP, 4.60 FIP, 4.24 xFIP, 4.42 SIERA Clearly Player A is a better pitcher but here is the other thing that I want you to consider: Would you pay Player A nearly five times as much salary over Player B? For example if Player B makes $3,000,000 would you pay Player A $14.6 million to pitch for the Angels? In a baseball world of increasing salaries these are questions that our front office and many others are having to struggle with in roster construction and I think it would be interesting to hear some of your thoughts on this hypothetical decision.

Again, and I've said it before, I like Howie and in a perfect world I would probably keep him on the team. However we have a real and serious need for starting pitchers and the free agent market is seriously lacking in decent choices. Additionally we are probably on a tight budget as far as spending unless Arte decides to blow past the luxury tax threshold and even then the SP choices are not good so what would be the point unless we take on a contract like Cliff Lee's? Every pitcher starts somewhere and that is as a Minor League player. Yes there is some risk built in to acquiring prospects but the closer they are to the Major Leagues (AA/AAA) the better. That doesn't guarantee a damn thing but it is cheaper, has potential upside, is better for the long term health of the club, and can give us the depth. This does assume that the Angels scouting staff knows what they are doing. So to recap Jim I get what you are saying but our options to improve our pitching are limited in free agency (Tanaka being probably the best target and more and more teams are entering the race for him every day), mainly due to the quality of the pitchers available, and.are limited through trade (talking established big league pitchers). Trading for prospects seems to be the only feasible option.

As a confidence builder I'm glad to see him putting up spectacular numbers. The clear obvious warning sign is that .476 BABIP which is clearly inflating his numbers. But at a more normal BABIP (.300) what does he look like? I suspect it's still good, perhaps something like .280/.370/.500???? Glad to see he's making an impact though for sure. I hope this bodes well for next year. It would certainly be nice to see him blossom even if it is to eventually be traded due to the logjam on the big league roster.

Actually I think we can get more than that for Kendrick and Iannetta. If we don't ask for Sanchez (who is in A ball anyway and won't help the big league club for probably 2 years) I imagine we could pry Marcus Stroman (AA) and Sean Nolin (AAA/Majors) along with Casey Janssen and maybe even a 4th prospect. If we sent Kevin Jepsen (cheaper reliever with probably two more "value" years of control) too I don't see why we couldn't acquire another reliever type like John Stilson (I'm not a big fan of Jepsen and think he needs a change of scenery but this last part is more personal opinion). Stroman and Nolin would give us two starting pitchers. Nolin, a back-end-of-the-rotation type, could even be inserted in the rotation next season if a Vargas re-signing proves difficult for some reason. Stroman could continue to develop in the minors (and serve out his banned substance suspension) and has the ceiling of a #2/#3 type. A trade like this would allow us to move Trumbo for another starting pitcher to give us even more depth. This would allow us to focus more of our actual dollars on one decent SP whether it is Tanaka, Vargas, or someone else.

C.J. Cron, Solar Sox: 34 PA's, .414/.471/.759/1.230, .476 BABIP Discuss!

As I mentioned in a previous article, prior to the trade deadline, the idea of a S-C-I-O-S-C-I-A trade to the Dodgers wasn't that far fetched. However, it seems all but dead now that Mattingly's option vested and the Angels officially announced Mike's return for 2014 so talking about it further seems moot.