Internal Options

by ArkAngel on Jan 21, 2009 3:43 PM PST

Are we really done?

I'm as optimistic as the next guy, but I've had a feeling since the Fuentes signing that the front office really hadn't finished making acquisitions this winter. Reagins has been very vocal about making no more offensive moves, but many have wondered if he was waiting to swoop in on Manny or Dunn.

I'm a little surprised to read though that we seem certain to begin the season with no more moves on the pitching front either. Certainly we have a few guys who can challenge for the fifth spot in the rotation...and we have to keep in mind that Escobar is coming back. But again, I've always had a hunch (hope?) that we would take a look at giving Sheets an incentive-laden contract. The thought of watching Moseley flail for half a season is none too appetizing.

If we're done, we're done. But I have to admit that I was hoping for more.

This Fan-Post is authored by an independent fan. Tell us what you think and how you feel.

Tweet Comment 33 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

the pitching concerns me more than the offense

i would be a lot more comfortable with our offense as it is now knowing we had five proven starting pitchers.

petitte, sheets, or even bring back garland.

by NoDakHalo on Jan 21, 2009 4:11 PM PST reply actions

I couldn't feel more differently

The ST competition for the #5 spot is going to be exciting.

Why do you assume that Moseley will win the job? Moseley could just as easily end up in the bullpen and our #5 starter is Adenhart or Green or whoever.

I am WAY more concerned about the offense than pitching. To even have a discussion in which the main worry is who’s going to be the #5 starter is proof itself that the rotation is D-E-E-P.

by Higz on Jan 21, 2009 4:14 PM PST reply actions

I disagree about D-E-E-P...

and I am concerned that we are one “shoulder discomfort” away from having a three man rotation with a piss poor offense. That is a recipe for climbing into an early season hole that we may not be able to get out of.

by Wytelitning on Jan 21, 2009 4:34 PM PST up reply actions

Dude, that's every team in baseball.

Deep is a relative term. There are few rotations deeper than ours.

by Higz on Jan 21, 2009 4:37 PM PST up reply actions

I said nothing about concern

I simply have heard Reagins say that we are done adding on the offensive side…at least that’s the impression I got. Obviously, our offense is lacking more than our pitching. But if we were going to add someone, I felt it would be a pitcher.

I don’t assume Moseley will get the #5 spot. I doubt he will. I just said that the thought of seeing him every fifth day gives me the screaming heebie-jeebies. I doubt that Adenhart or Green are ready. I hope I’m wrong.

I don't know...I'm makin' this up as I go.

by ArkAngel on Jan 21, 2009 4:45 PM PST up reply actions

I'm so confused

The whole tone of your diary was that of a fan concerned about the effectiveness and completeness of the starting rotation, but since you didn’t use the word “concern” I guess I’m reading too much into your post, right?

You “doubt” Moseley will get the #5 spot, but in the original post you all but say that without signing a free agent, Moseley will be the #5 guy until Escobar returns. What gives?

I swear that English is my first langauge and I haven’t taken any crazy pills today.

by Higz on Jan 21, 2009 5:09 PM PST up reply actions

Here. Let me rewrite it. Just for you.

I was hoping we’d make at least one more signing. This article seems to indicate we won’t.

I was hoping we’d have someone outside the organization fill the #5 spot as I’m not confident in Moseley or any other contender for the role at this point.

I wasn’t writing a tone poem. Just musing as a fan on the latest indication that our front office seems to be ready to go with the team as is. I’ll try to be clearer in the future.

I don't know...I'm makin' this up as I go.

by ArkAngel on Jan 21, 2009 6:23 PM PST up reply actions

It's true: You are making this up as you go

by Higz on Jan 22, 2009 9:55 AM PST up reply actions

Whoo. Go Sheets.

Seriously, the guy is unhittable when he’s healthy. And it’s not like he’s Rich Harden either – if we can get him to pitch like 130 innings or so, that would be a great help, since we don’t have a 5th starter right now. Escobar is hurt and we don’t know if he’ll come back effectively, Adenhart was awful in the majors and minors last year, and no, Moseley does not count as a proven major league starter. Bringing back Garland for one more year wouldn’t be the answer either, as his numbers are set for a pretty big dropoff.

replacement level analysis

by 442 on Jan 21, 2009 8:18 PM PST reply actions 1 recs

I couldn't agree more. Except...

…I don’t think he’ll be worth what he gets. If we could get him reasonably, absolutely. But he’ll get a multi-year…and we really only need someone in ’09.

I don't know...I'm makin' this up as I go.

by ArkAngel on Jan 21, 2009 9:01 PM PST up reply actions

I agree with Sheets but not for $12+ mil

Sheets will most likely sign an incentive laden deal starting at $8 mil and moving into the mid teens if he hits all the incentives. Unless he pitches less than 75 innings that sounds like a good deal to me regardless of what happens. The guy started last year’s all-star game for god sake and he’s still unsigned in late January.

I think getting Lackey signed to a long term deal should be top priority. As much as a solid 5th starter makes perfect sense I still think there are better low dollar deals out there (like Chad Cordero & a $5-6mil/yr Dunn).

by halo nation on Jan 21, 2009 9:09 PM PST up reply actions

¿Que?

Garland’s numbers are set for a pretty big dropoff? For a 5th starter?

Let’s see: Last year, he showed up for just under 200 IP in 32 starts, finished the season at 14-8 and had an ERA under 5. If that isn’t a good 5th in the rotation, then show me who is, especially since you’re already conceding Sheets might be limited to “130 innings or so”.

I will concede that his WHIP is worse than in prior years, but we’re talking about a 5th starter, not an ace. He may well be one of those pitchers who would sign a one-year deal, since the market is so slow and he is a native of SoCal. But criminy, he doesn’t even turn 29 until mid-season—there are far worse options out there.

by George Kaplan on Jan 22, 2009 4:46 AM PST up reply actions

I just like the upside down ?

Rad.

I don't know...I'm makin' this up as I go.

by ArkAngel on Jan 22, 2009 9:16 AM PST up reply actions

Thank you

I live to entertain.

by George Kaplan on Jan 22, 2009 9:49 AM PST up reply actions

Reasons:

1) Low HR rate compared to his career %
2) Declining K rate (4.12/9IP – that is Carlos Silva)
3) Rising BB rate
4) And FWIW, high WHIP

But, I admit, I’m willing to eat my words. I’ve always thought of Garland as a little overrated, but I guess he’ll be okay as a 5th starter, although I wouldn’t be surprised by a blow-up season.

Still, Team Sheets. Or for that matter, there are still very good options out there other than Sheets.

replacement level analysis

by 442 on Jan 22, 2009 4:23 PM PST up reply actions

What other options are good?

I’m really asking…not judging the opinion.

I was so grateful we didn’t get into the Lowe bidding. And hoping we stay away from Perez and Garland. I’m just wondering what other options exist that are truly good. I may be a bit biased against mediocre pitchers.

I don't know...I'm makin' this up as I go.

by ArkAngel on Jan 22, 2009 5:42 PM PST up reply actions

Mostly

I’m a fan of taking flyers on guys such as Sheets, Mulder, Pedro, etc. but here are some options :

Chuck James : if he can harness his control he will be effective, still young
Randy Wolf : still strikes out plenty (7.66/9 last year) and traditionally does not give up HRs
Paul Byrd : he’s basically still the same pitcher we saw in 2005
Braden Looper : I have an unexplainable fetish for Braden Looper. I have no idea why. Still, healthy K/BB rate. Same goes for Odaliz Perez.

Hm. Maybe I was exaggerating a bit when I said “very good options”. I withdraw my case.

replacement level analysis

by 442 on Jan 22, 2009 8:28 PM PST up reply actions

Yeah

With most of those guys, I would really just as soon give one of our kids the shot. But it does drive home how good Sheets is in relation to the rest of the field.

I don't know...I'm makin' this up as I go.

by ArkAngel on Jan 22, 2009 11:15 PM PST up reply actions

Adenhart's stats aren't as bad as they look

A .356 BABIP, especially at SLC. will do that to a pticher’s line. Add in a .391 BABIP om Anaheim, and you know something’s got to give. Yes, he needs to cut down on his walks. And…well, get a little luckier.

"There's nothing that cleanses your soul like getting the hell kicked out of you." - Woody Hayes

by johnnyangel101 on Jan 21, 2009 9:00 PM PST reply actions

Well

BABIP isn’t purely luck. If the pitcher’s getting letting hitters make good contact every time he’s out there, the BABIP will obviously rise. If he’s had such an awful BABIP for a full year, I have to wonder if there’s another lurking variable in there.

replacement level analysis

by 442 on Jan 22, 2009 8:30 PM PST up reply actions

19.6 LD% rate and a 47.8 GB% rate

in his major league career (12 innings) does not point to such a high BABIP

Lets go angels

by anaheim angels on Jan 23, 2009 3:14 PM PST up reply actions

Huh?

My point was that you can’t expect a pitcher to improve because his BABIP was bad.

replacement level analysis

by 442 on Jan 24, 2009 12:56 AM PST up reply actions

true, but allowing for regression towards the mean for BABIP points to much better results

A better (lower) BABIP means alot less runners which translates to a lower ERA/batting avg against, etc…

Lets go angels

by anaheim angels on Jan 24, 2009 11:43 PM PST up reply actions

i'm oddly okay with this

mostly because i think i prepared myself for it.

like Ninja said… it’s time to see what the kids can do (not just the position players). let’s see what Moseley, Adenhart or Ortega can do with a full season.

Kotch would've had that.

by howiestheman on Jan 21, 2009 10:34 PM PST reply actions

Like I've always said....

Let them(meaning everyone) play. We’ll find our fifth starter, and Big Bat in house, or not at all…Let the youngsters play!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

YOU DON'T KNOW THE POWER OF THE DARKSIDE.....

by halofolife on Jan 22, 2009 12:44 AM PST reply actions

This is the year for the kids to run their chances

I’m no expert at baseball analysis compared to the people on this site, but it seems to me that this is, in relative terms, something of a rebuilding year. Not that I’m saying Arte/Ninja have given up in the least, just that they seem to feel (as do I) that the team stands an excellent chance of winning the division as they are now, so why not give all the young talent a thorough opportunity to show what they can do?

I expect that when July rolls around, the Angels anticipate having some excellent opportunities to fill any holes that become evident, and are maintaining a considerable level of payroll flexibility in preparation for this.

Not that I wouldn’t love to see the team add more power and a solid fifth starter, but it seems highly unlikely that either of these things will happen, given that Reagins has so far shown himself to be one who says what he means.

". . .and the young lions will lock horns!" -- Ron Fairly, from an Angels telecast

by rspencer on Jan 22, 2009 1:58 AM PST reply actions 2 recs

I think this is dead on

by rghan on Jan 22, 2009 2:10 AM PST up reply actions

Absolutely...

…this is what’s going on with Wood and Morales too.

You give young players a chance when there is less pressure, when they have the relative freedom to go through their growing pains. When Oakland, Texas (probably not Seattle because they are, and probably always will be, utterly without hope) finally show up with a team worthy of the name, our young pups will be ready to snarl.

I see red people

by The Limey on Jan 22, 2009 9:21 AM PST up reply actions

Here's what I think is happening...

I do think the Angels are content to use internal options for the #5 spot in the rotation, just as they’re willing to go with the young guys in the batting order, until late May-early June.

If players like Sheets and Dunn are seeing their earning potential drop during this pre-season, imagine what teams will do once the fans aren’t showing up due to less disposable income. This may be the strategy the Angels (and some other teams) are using; do nothing now, but pounce when better players are made available during the season due to salary dumps, etc. Could Huff be gotten cheaply when the Orioles are 12 games out on May 18th? How about Brandon Webb who’s in the last year of his contract (2010 option)?

I don’t think the Angels are doing nothing, I think they are just following a plan.

I was uncool before uncool was cool.

by WiHaloFan on Jan 22, 2009 9:51 AM PST reply actions

Yes! it all makes sense now.

Although I would love to see Sheets in the rotation(especially at 8+ mil) maybe they are sticking to a plan.

We'll DO IT LIVE!!!!!

by blochead on Jan 22, 2009 12:01 PM PST reply actions

Sheets is the only FA I like for the Angels...

He shouldn’t be too expensive as a possible second ace, certianly not as much money as breakdown machine AJ Burnett. I agree with most folks here that letting Morales, Wood, Rivera, and Aybar get to it will be more helpful in finding out what the team REALLY needs come July, and while I’m sure the Angels could find a 5th starter that wouldn’t murder the team, if you can get Sheets for $7-9 mill plus performance bonuses you go for it.

I think Escobar is a bullpen guy at best this year, and maybe the best way to keep him effective as his career starts to wind down. Moseley seems to do well in spot starts but not when he’s The Man, and while I’m sure any of the Big Three pitching prospects could do it, if you can get Sheets on the cheap, DO IT.

by Kernel on Jan 22, 2009 1:03 PM PST reply actions

Angels second half with Sheets:

Signing Sheets at a reasonable price (with incentives) and letting Escobar come back slowly in the pen gives us:

Lackey
Sheets
Santana
Saunders
Weaver

with a back end of the bullpen 4 deep:

Arredondo
Shields
Escobar
Fuentes

When you add the fact that we now have the depth of Moseley, Adenhart, and Green as spot starters/injury replacements, there is a lot to like about this.

I don't know...I'm makin' this up as I go.

by ArkAngel on Jan 22, 2009 1:46 PM PST up reply actions