I cautiously ask, how 'bout a Tigers pitcher?

by Rally Manatee on Nov 17, 2008 2:50 PM PST

From mlb's main page: "A dog-eared rumor was revived by the Boston Globe, which reported the Tigers and Red Sox are still considering a trade of a Detroit left-hander -- either Nate Robertson or Dontrelle Willis -- for shortstop Julio Lugo."

Anyone up for trading Aybar straight up for either of those guys? If trading for Peavey is too costly? Or would it be better to just bring up a rookie? I know they both have had questionable performances recently, but we wouldn't have to give up the farm, we could keep our money for signing Tex, and just pray whichever guy we take turns it around next year. Either guy would most likely at least pitch as well as Garland did last year.

Besides, I've always liked both of their styles. Robertson is frickin Rick Vaughn, and Willis might beat Vlad in a smiling contest.

OK, go ahead and blast me.

This Fan-Post is authored by an independent fan and may or may not be a reflection of human evolution, divine enlightenment or nine cans into a 12-pack.

0 recs | Comment 25 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

willis is paid a lot for a AAA starter who walks everyone

by ihearhowie2.0 on Nov 17, 2008 3:07 PM PST 0 recs

Willis isn't even a AAA pitcher

He spent most of 2008 pitching for high-A Lakeland.

Witty .sig goes here.

by scareduck on Nov 17, 2008 3:08 PM PST up 0 recs

Well

I doubt the Tigers would accept a straight-up trade for Aybar for either of these guys. And that’s probably OK for us. Nate Robertson is basically a left-handed Dustin Moseley. And while I get the Rick Vaughn comparison to Robertson, I think it’s even more applicable to Dontrelle, what with his ridiculous control issues last year. That being said, if the Tigers trade away either of these guys for Julio frickin Lugo, they deserve to have another shitty year.

by Higz on Nov 17, 2008 3:08 PM PST 0 recs

They'd unload Willis to anyone for free.

by snowhor on Nov 17, 2008 3:55 PM PST up 0 recs

Yeah, well Rick Vaughn was young and had up side (fastball) too...

by Higz on Nov 17, 2008 4:24 PM PST up 0 recs

Maybe Robertson needs some glasses?

Angels fan since '67

by red floyd on Nov 17, 2008 4:33 PM PST up 0 recs

No

I like our rotation the way it is, UNLESS we can get a clear, significant upgrade, a la Peavy. Trading for Robertson or Willis wouldn’t really upgrade our rotation and would more than likely just wind up costing us more than anything else.

Light Up That Halo!

by Clutch on Nov 17, 2008 3:12 PM PST 0 recs

The D-Train

has permanently left the station. He’s done. Nate Robertson sucks too. F them.

by Chzburger Jones on Nov 17, 2008 3:42 PM PST 0 recs

Consider yourself blasted

I don’t know that I would trade Aybar straight up for Verlander after what that weak-armed mo-fo did for my fantasy team’s pitching…

by Rev Halofan on Nov 17, 2008 3:49 PM PST 0 recs

Nate Robertson had an ERA last year of 6.35, leading the league in ERs allowed

He has had exactly one year where his ERA was better than the league’s. He’s in deep decline, he has no upside, and he is 31 years old.

You do not trade 24-year-old starting shortstops with the most defensive talent in the league for old bags of crap.

by mattwelch on Nov 17, 2008 3:49 PM PST 0 recs

no thanks

we don’t need another jeff weaver. We have 4 or 5 pitchers that are capable of competing for the 5th spot in the rotation. I like our chances of getting at least one of those guys to out perform garland.

legen... wait for it... dary

by thebigA on Nov 17, 2008 4:58 PM PST 0 recs

Maybe a change of scenery...

We could trade bad contracts and send them GMJ

by KyRod on Nov 17, 2008 5:02 PM PST 2 recs

2nd that!

Peanuts...Get your Overpriced Peanuts!

by Angel Hawker on Nov 17, 2008 6:30 PM PST up 0 recs

You're all right

I agree, one of our rookies can probably do just as well as Willis or Robertson, and maybe as well as Garland. I just don’t want to trade Kendrick for Peavey. S-Rod in Kendrick’s place would most likely be too big a drop off in offense.

Scioscia - He provides to unlike method of your team member.

by Rally Manatee on Nov 17, 2008 5:37 PM PST 0 recs

Willis has way too many

moving parts. He may have flashes of brilliance again in his career but I can’t see him being consistent (though he’s still young enough to prove me wrong).

And the trouble with Nate Robertson is clearly that he’s, well, Nate Robertson. I think I’d rather have Scott Schoenweiss on the roster (and, believe me, I don’t want him the roster at all).

Now, put Chris Pritchett at first, Bobby Rose at second, Pete Coachmen at third, and let's go win.

by GarretSaysSuckIt on Nov 17, 2008 6:30 PM PST 0 recs

Robertson and Willis are awful.

I would rather have the Angels sign Randy Johnson to a 1-year incentive laden contract.

1) RJ is an upgrade over Garland
2) Limited risk; it’s only a 1-year contract, most likely for less than $10 million
3) Angels are better off signing free agents, rather than give up their depth.

Also on my free agent wish list:
1) Tex
2) Juan Cruz
3) Juan Rivera
4) Darren Oliver

Ain't no stoppin' us now. We got the groove!

by Fan Since 1981 on Nov 17, 2008 8:00 PM PST 0 recs

juan cruz?

yes please.

but i think the only reliever (besides Oliver) we might be looking at will be a closer.

and i would still love to see Adam Dunn.

Kotch would've had that.

by howiestheman on Nov 17, 2008 8:29 PM PST up 0 recs

Hadn't thought of Randy

intriguing

Scioscia - He provides to unlike method of your team member.

by Rally Manatee on Nov 17, 2008 10:07 PM PST up 0 recs

it had been suggested a few weeks ago

but there’s already been on article on angelsbb.com debunking an interest in him

Kotch would've had that.

by howiestheman on Nov 17, 2008 10:22 PM PST up 0 recs

Garland

he wasn’t bad folks. he ate up innings and won some games. he wasn’t asked to be an ace. he came in to be #3. he ended being more of a #4 then a #3 but who cares he did a good job. he finished poorly but man he had a good yr for us.

by HALO_86 on Nov 19, 2008 10:22 AM PST up 0 recs

Here's a big "what if"

What if Santana and/or Saunders hadn’t stepped it up last year? Garland would have been a very important pitcher on the staff. His numbers may have been better if he was in the position to pitch in “must win” situations rather than being just a #4 or #5 guy. I’m not suggesting he could have pitched better, but some players do perform better under pressure and Garland was never under real pressure to perform.

I still feel acquiring him was a good move, even though he was kinda expensive ($12M plus the cash sent to Chicago), but it was a good insurance policy.

I suppose it’s naive to think a player can do better or worse depending on their situation, one woould think they’d do their best regardless.

I was uncool before uncool was cool.

by WiHaloFan on Nov 19, 2008 11:43 AM PST up 0 recs

Garland

i always thought Garland was aquired because we were about to make that Cabrera deal with the Marlins. i wonder how people would have felt if we still lost with Cabrera to the Redsox and Santana and HK had the yrs they did with the Marlins and whoever else was suppose to go over there. i still think it was a good deal regardless because he was a dependable vet you can rely on when you had ? with the young guys.

by HALO_86 on Nov 19, 2008 11:55 AM PST up 0 recs

I'd love to get Garland again, BUT

we need a big bat more than a 5th starter. If we don’t sign Tex or some other FA big bat (holding my nose as I say, “mmMan Ram”), then by all means throw some money at Garland, and try to trade for a big bat instead. But it seems like FA starting pitchers are going to get overpaid once again this year. So, Garland is going to get more than he’s really worth somewhere.

Scioscia - He provides to unlike method of your team member.

by Rally Manatee on Nov 19, 2008 1:41 PM PST up 0 recs

I think he want a multi-year contract too

Which would be another drawback for the Angels to sign him.

I was uncool before uncool was cool.

by WiHaloFan on Nov 19, 2008 3:37 PM PST up 0 recs

Angels need to avoid Garland

His K rate has fallen to 4.12 K/9 while his control has gotten worse. His only plus is that he pitches a decent number of innings, but he is too hittable. In the 2nd half of 2008 opponents cranked out an AVG/OBP/SLG of .322/.363/.489 against Garland, which resulted in an ERA of 5.99.

Garland’s best option is to sign with a NL team.

Ain't no stoppin' us now. We got the groove!

by Fan Since 1981 on Nov 19, 2008 6:19 PM PST 0 recs