Nightmare AK Scenario
by Sixtyminuteman on Aug 11, 2006 4:19 PM PDT
18 comments
We've pretty much just assumed that the Kendrick/AK problem will resolve itself next year because AK won't be back. However, what if the following plays out:
(1) Due to his poor 2006 performance, no team offers him anything close to big $$$;
(2) Therefore, due to his apparently insatiable desire to remain with the Angels, he goes to Stoneman and offers to sign for peanuts, thus avoiding being shown the door like Glaus & Molina because of big contract demands;
(3) Because AK is within sniffing distance of the 25-man, Scioscia takes him with the club out of spring training;
(4) Because he is in the dugout, Scioscia feels compelled to play him a la Erstad, GA, Figgins, etc.; and
(5) Because AK cannot play anywhere but 2B, Kendrick plays out of position, or goes to AAA a la Jered Weaver if Kotchman & McPherson seize the corners.
Am I on crack to think this is even remotely possible?
This Fan-Post is authored by an independent fan. Tell us what you think and how you feel.
0 recs |
18 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Crank-y.
If Scioscia has a weakness
by Rev Halofan on Aug 14, 2006 12:47 PM PDT up reply actions
One thing Stoneman hasn't been afraid to do..
Not possible
This only matters if the Angels offer him arbitration. After the way they handled the Bengie situation, I don't see that happening.
(2) Therefore, due to his apparently insatiable desire to remain with the Angels, he goes to Stoneman and offers to sign for peanuts, thus avoiding being shown the door like Glaus & Molina because of big contract demands;
They can't offer him peanuts. If they don't offer arbitration and he doesn't sign anywhere else, they can't negotiate a new deal until May 1st. If they do offer arbitration, they either work a new deal out beforehand, or actually go to arbitration. If they offer arbitration, he can't be paid "peanuts" next year. They have to pay at least something very similar to what he got this year. Which is probably why they won't offer arbitration.
(3) Because AK is within sniffing distance of the 25-man, Scioscia takes him with the club out of spring training;
If he's still with the club, I guarantee you he breaks camp with the team. They'd have to release him and pay his whole salary otherwise.
Am I on crack to think this is even remotely possible?
Well, either on crack or unfamiliar with the collective bargaining agreement.
You overlook that
by Sixtyminuteman on Aug 11, 2006 9:49 PM PDT up reply actions
Even if...
Agree
Also, what kind of b.s. is this: "Scioscia feels compelled to play him ala ...GA,Figgins?"
Get a life.
Apparently
And I like how you omitted Erstad when quoting what I said. Do you really think Erstad wouldn't be in the lineup everyday, no matter how poorly he was hitting, if he was healthy? I know I'm not the only one here who believes that.
Get yourself a life.
by Sixtyminuteman on Aug 12, 2006 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah,
You included him to try to bolster your argument and you know it.
Figgy and GA are solid major leaguers -- you don't know what you're talking about.
Solid?
GA is a solid DH against RHP. Is that where he is being used? No. Try to convince me he is a "solid" defensive LF or "solid" against LHP (although he has been better lately). Heck, convince me he is "solid" on any level, given the amount of time he has to sit because of injuries when he plays too many days in a row.
Maybe you don't know what you're talking about.
by Sixtyminuteman on Aug 12, 2006 4:30 PM PDT up reply actions
Solid
Someone made the point the other day that Rivera has something like 5 errors in LF while GA has ZERO. Got that? Zero. I would call that "solid" to say the least. And don't let me hear you echo what Rev. said about him not getting to balls, because if YOU really watched the games you'd know that GA is great at getting to balls down the line and holding runners to singles or throwing them out going into second. He makes plays most other LF's don't make down the line.
Granted with the plantar condition he is not as good as he was 2 or 3 years ago but he is certainly "solid."
It has always pissed me off royally to go to games and hear our own fans whine about GA's defense and call him a "cadillac" etc. They diss him all over the place and then when he makes a nice throw or catch they act like they were always in his corner. You seem like one of these types of fans to me.
I think it was Higdog the other day who said that most of these folks who are dissing GA would shit themselves if they saw him in public and he so much as gave them the time of day. It's just ridiculous hypocrisy. These are the same fans that I'm sure were cheering the loudest when he hit a 3 run jack off of Randy Johnson in Game 3 of the ALDS last year and laid the ground work for that pivotal victory. The same ones who probably jumped out of their seats when he homered off Mussina to again get the Halos off to a key early lead in the pivotal Game 5 vs. New York. This kind of b.s. makes me sick.
As for his defense, yeah, the guy looks casual out there. That's not because he's "dogging" it as people say.. If you really pay attention not that many balls get by GA to go to the wall unless they are shots. He consistently gets great reads and very good jumps on most balls. He therefore gets to balls earlier than most and thus DOESN'T HAVE TO DIVE to make catches. But you obviously don't understand these kinds of nuances. If you don't believe me then just ask some baseball coaches what they think about GA's defense.
As for Figgy, you're being shortsighted. You're the worst kind of "what have you done for me lately" fan. Yeah, Figgy had a subpar first half. But he has picked it up considerably since the break (as I predicted he would).
Again, for someone who supposedly "doesn't watch the games," I've seen enough to know that Figgy has been scorching the ball consistently this season and has been incredibly unlucky, with line drives being hit right at people time and again. Yes, I know luck is part of baseball, but if YOU really watched the games as you accuse me of not doing you know that Figgy is a very good major league hitter who has been snake bit. And for someone who has watched baseball for over thirty years I can tell you that these things even out over time. These line drives will start to fall. It's not like he's McPherson and striking out every third time up.
I haven't even mentioned Figgy's incredible defensive flexibility or value as a switch-hitter. Oh yeah, and I suppose it meant nothing that he was co-team MVP last year and led the MAJORS in stolen bases. His teammates think he's a pretty damn good player and valuable. But you know more than they do, right?
Yeah, that sounds like a guy Scioscia should bench and not play at all. Or better yet trade away for nothing. What a joke.
exactly
we won the world series with figgins on the bench. bench figgy
or whatever the hell it says.
thats bullshit.
we won the world series with percival as the closer. maybe we should pull him out of retirement?
how about erstad? he was our starting center fielder in 02. throw him back out there in center, injuries and all!
times change, jackass.
if you want to see figgins benched, fine.
but your reason shouldn't be because "he came off the bench 4 years ago, so why not now?"
Powerful Logic
Insightful, well-reasoned commentary. You win.
by Sixtyminuteman on Aug 13, 2006 8:43 PM PDT up reply actions
The truth about Figgy...
He's currently hitting .25 points below his career average of .285, and his OPS is .56 points lower than his career average. His defense has regressed as well.
As a true leadoff hitter, he only needs to get on base at a respectable clip and score runs. He needs to be able to bunt and put the ball in play on the ground or on a line. He strikes out at far too high a rate for a slap hitting leadoff guy with a low walk rate and little power. He also hits too many fly balls for a guy with little power. He's a good 8 or 9 hitter providing he's not lumped together with other slap hitters (which he is in Izzy and AK).
He's a solid major leaguer who would start for many teams, I give you that. However being last in the league in the one stat that's most important for a leadoff guy (OBP) is not acceptable. Sure he's been unlucky, but even if 9 or 10 of those hard hit balls go through, he's still only at his career average, which is also mediocre in every facet save for stolen bases.
Given his age (28), and the steady playing time he gets, I don't envision him getting much better. Plate discipline shows itself early in a career and rarely surfaces mid-prime.
After this season he's got to be moved (while he still has value as a starter) to shore up holes elsewhere since the only likely big bats are going to be OFs, and 3B is Izzy's short term and possibly Wood's in a couple years. 2B is HK's for the next dozen years.
In a different lineup and hitting 9th, he'd have value. On a team desperate for more slugging and OBP, his presence is a drag on the whole offense. If only he could drag bunt.
Wanna know what's funny?
I agree with everything you said except for two minor points:
- plate discipline CAN improve with age, although it doesn't for everybody, especially those whose hitting coaches have the initials M.H. Jim Edmonds and Gary Sheffield are two players, off the top of my head, who dramatically increased their walk rates with experience. Walks have long been considered an "old players" skill, as batters learn their own strengths and recognize pitches. Garret Anderson is not one of those players, unfortunately.
- I like the idea of keeping Figgins in order for him to fill the spot of the inevitable injury, kinda like what he did before this year. As you stated, his strength is his versatility. It's nice to have one guy, with decent major league skills, who can spell a player (regardless of position) for a month (or even a season) in case of serious injury. I'm with you, though - he's a perfect #9 hitter...
by johnnyangel101 on Aug 14, 2006 12:23 AM PDT up reply actions
I said "rarely" for a reason
Edmonds' surge in walks coincided with a big surge in K's. His power stats made that tradeoff worthwhile, but Figgins doesn't have that option.
Guys like Edmonds and Sheff have been walked intentionally plenty in their careers. That won't ever happen to Figgy.
I too would like to see Figgins stay as a super-sub, but I just think Scioscia would play him too much. Kinda like with Ersty last year and AK this year. We shall see.
by darkangel01 on Aug 14, 2006 12:59 AM PDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
