Adding Up the Worst Trade Ever: 5 Fewer Wins for $8.65 Million More in 2011
Let's close the numerical books on the first year of the Worst Trade Ever. First, a straight-up comparison of the two left fielders involved, which reveals that we paid 3.4 times the salary of Juan Rivera in 2011 for essentially the same production from Vernon Wells:
NM G PA AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB/CS BB SO AVG OBP SLG OPS+ oWAR dWAR WAR $mil VW: 131 529 505 60 110 15 4 25 66 9/4 20 86 .218 .248 .412 83 0.2 -0.5 -0.3 $18.0 JR: 132 521 466 46 120 23 1 11 74 5/3 43 76 .258 .319 .382 91 0.3 -0.8 -0.5 $5.3More important than the $12.75 million cost overrun in 2011, of course, is the $63 million owed Wells over the next three seasons. If we assume an average Angel payroll of $150 million for the next three years (it was around $142 million this year), a full 14% of that will be paying for the pleasure of watching a rapidly aging player who was no better in 2011 than Juan Rivera -- a soon-to-be free agent who will be lucky to win a $2 million, one-year contract in 2012.
There is still another cost associated here: Phenom Mike Trout made his major league debut on July 8, and from that point through the end of the year was a much more valuable player than Vernon Wells, putting up a Wins Above Replacement of 0.9 over 135 plate appearances. During that period, Vernon Wells had twice the amount of playing time -- 272 plate appearances. If the left fielder sucking gas and blocking Trout had been Juan Rivera instead of a former All-Star in the first of a 4-year, $81 million contractual obligation, Juan Rivera would have been benched, and Mike Trout would have launched his career as a starting outfielder. If you would have given Mike Trout the 272 PAs, and Vernon Wells the 135, and they had played at the same rate, the team would have received around 1.7 WAR from the left field spot the rest of the year instead of the 0.7 we got. One extra win might not sound like much, until you reflect on how long it took this team to be eliminated.
Now let's bring the pain: Mike Napoli, Jeff Mathis, Hank Conger, and Bobby Wilson.
NM G GC PA AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO AVG OBP SLG OPS+ oWAR dWAR WAR $mil MN: 113 61 432 369 72 118 25 0 30 75 58 85 .320 .414 .631 171 4.9 0.6 5.5 $5.8 JM: 93 91 281 247 18 43 12 0 3 22 15 75 .174 .225 .259 37 -0.5 0.2 -0.3 $1.7 HC: 59 56 197 177 14 37 8 0 6 19 17 37 .209 .282 .356 80 0.7 -0.4 0.3 $0.4 BW: 57 47 127 111 5 21 8 0 1 8 10 16 .189 .252 .288 53 -0.2 0.1 -0.1 $0.4
Before you say "Duh, Arlington!", remember that Napoli hit even better this year on the road: .332/.414/.663. To which Mike Scioscia might say, "Well yeah, but Napoli only caught 61 games!" Fair enough -- since many of us would have simply DFA'd Jeff Mathis rather than pay him $1.7 million to be one of the worst hitters in the history of major league baseball, let's simply subtract his 281 plate appearances from 2011 and replace them with Napoli's 243 plate appearances as a catcher:
PA AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB/CS BB SO AVG OBP SLG OPS+ oWAR Real: 583 516 38 99 27 0 10 48 1/4 40 125 .192 .252 .302 56 0.0 Fake: 545 478 64 132 27 0 26 69 2/3 56 92 .276 .354 .496 144 3.5
Yep, that's the difference between playing Mathis half-time and playing Napoli half-time. I'll let you catch your breath. Though the OPS+ and offensive WAR numbers in the Napoli scenario are a bit eyeballed, they're in the ballpark. Long story short, we would have gone from having one of the worst lines of offensive production from any position on any team, to having one of the best. For $4.1 million more than we paid in 2011 at the catching position, we would have received a total of 3.5 WAR at the position instead of -0.1.
So let's add up the alternative scenarios. If the trade never happened, Jeff Mathis and his -0.3 WAR got DFA'd, Mike Napoli and his 3.5 WAR at the catching position remained, and Mike Trout started playing full time on July 8 with Juan Rivera reduced to a bench role ... we're talking about a net gain of around 5 Wins Above Replacement in 2011, and that's not even counting Napoli's extracurricular work at 1B and DH. How many games did we finish out of the playoffs? Five. Subtract Napoli's 5.5 WAR from Texas, and add our 5, and that 10-game spread in the American League West looks a whole lot different. All this for $8.65 million less than we paid out in 2011, and only a one-year Napoli arbitration raise in 2012 instead of a $63 million Vernon Wells black hole from 2012-14. You think maybe Arte wishes he had a spare $25 million lying around in an offseason where Albert Pujols and Prince Fielder are available?
Now, of course it is true that we cannot assume that Mike Napoli would have ever hit .320 in an Angel uniform, and perhaps it is unreasonable to assume that Mike Trout would have played at the same rate of effectiveness had he gone full time out there. But what we do know is this: At the rate these players played on the field in 2011, we would have been at least 5 wins better off for considerably less money.
This Fan-Post is authored by an independent fan. Tell us what you think and how you feel.
203 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
great take on the wells debacle...
it’s insane to realize that we would have been so much better off by releasing or trading naps for the crappiest prospect in the game than acquiring wells. vernon seems like a great guy but it’s got to be hard knowing that you got two gm’s fired.
Vernon has no idea why he's blamed for the firing of 2 GMs.
Maybe it’s just society.
Vernon Wells 2011 Stats (.218/.248/.412) and 2010 road stats (.224/.299/.400). The front office shouldn't have been surprised.
It's the recession
A wise man once said "never postpone to tomorrow what can be done the day after tomorrow. Except DFAing Mathis. Do that shit now, plz."
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Oct 1, 2011 6:30 PM PDT up reply actions
He's too blessed to be stressed
"I have something 95 percent of all those All-Stars only wish they had: a World Series ring. If I had to choose between that and being an All-Star, it would be no contest. I’d grab the gold ring and never look back." -Tim Salmon
by BruinHalo on Oct 3, 2011 9:11 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
You clearly misunderestimate the power of the solo home run
Vernon Wells was a force this year, and your stats and numbers mean nothing to my GUT INSTINCT.
Terrible article.
A wise man once said "never postpone to tomorrow what can be done the day after tomorrow. Except DFAing Mathis. Do that shit now, plz."
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Oct 1, 2011 3:14 PM PDT reply actions
You've seen 4000 games too?
I need to watch more baseball.
Bourjos is faster than...[insert person, item, object here]
by SD_AngelsFan#27 on Oct 1, 2011 7:56 PM PDT up reply actions
I hope some day you will witness as many as I have
so that you will better understand the game as I do.
A wise man once said "never postpone to tomorrow what can be done the day after tomorrow. Except DFAing Mathis. Do that shit now, plz."
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Oct 1, 2011 10:19 PM PDT up reply actions
Wow, three more years of infield pop fly balls, I can hardly wait.
Also, shouldn’t Mathis WAR be even worse? Whomever is tabulating these WAR stats are being awful nice to Jeffy. -0.3 WAR should be more like -30 WAR
CONGER, CONGER, CONGER !!!
Hey, whoa there. Those pop-ups are really deep drives to the rim of the grass.
Don’t sell VW short.
A wise man does not need advice and a fool won't take it.
by angelslogic on Oct 1, 2011 3:59 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
The worst part about losing Napoli is that there is no way to fix it in the short term. That bell cannot be unrung.
Where do we get his replacement? There is no one of his caliber that is available. I’ll be satisfied if the team gives Conger a shot next year by playing him full time. Let’s see what he can do with regular playing time.
A wise man does not need advice and a fool won't take it.
Conger has/had the potential to be more than adequate as his replacement
hell, he wasn’t doing THAT badly this year before management decided they needed a more ‘premium’ solution at catcher.
A wise man once said "never postpone to tomorrow what can be done the day after tomorrow. Except DFAing Mathis. Do that shit now, plz."
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Oct 1, 2011 4:16 PM PDT up reply actions
I wonder how Reagins feels about the Bill James and sabermetric people now.
Vernon Wells 2011 Stats (.218/.248/.412) and 2010 road stats (.224/.299/.400). The front office shouldn't have been surprised.
He probably feels like leaving a nasty Amazon review for Bill's new book under an assumed name
[One star] IMOHO, Bill James has zero credibility. In the interest of fairness, I must disclose that my regard for Bill James has been greatly influence by seeing him interviewed on the “Colbert Report”. When asked to comment on the physical appearance of violent criminals, he frankly states that attractive people don’t commit murder, ugly people do. To use his logic, Ted Bundy, Robert Chambers, etc. are innocent. Hey, why bother with all that pesky DNA evidence when you can judge a defendant’s guilt/innocence just by their appearance?
My suggestion, if you are still curious, wait till you can peruse it for free at your public library, and for any serious criminology students, don’t waist your time.
by Suboptimal on Oct 1, 2011 10:11 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
while I agree that the Wells trade was bad and hes WAY overpaid
the money is only marginally relevant: 1) Ticket prices are still among the cheapest in baseball, 2) Arte has always been consistent that he won’t let money stand in the way of an opportunity. If everything else lines up he’ll pay what it takes.
Captain, there are doubt''s...
Money is NOT marginally relevant when you are on a budget
And from 2004 ($115.1 million) to 2009 ($115.5 million, both numbers in constant 2010 dollars), this team had a flat budget. Reagins jacked payroll to $141.8 million in 2011, and poured on $63 million in obligations for 2012-14, all without building a championship-quality team. There is no chance in hell that Arte is not sensitive to the way his money is spent.
by mattwelch on Oct 1, 2011 5:43 PM PDT up reply actions 4 recs
But then that implies that we would never have been in the market for Fielder or Pujols
even if we hadn’t taken on Wells. If the budget was going to continue to stay flat.
Sure Reagins raised payroll, but he had a boss who gave him the OK. I don’t think Tony resigned because Arte thought he spent too much money. It was because Arte thought Tony would be better at evaluating talent.
Captain, there are doubt''s...
No, it implies that they jacked payroll for the wrong player.
Of course Arte fired Tony because of his failure to adequately judge talent. He tied up $86m of payroll over 4 years for a player that should be DFA’d.
Are you assuming Arte will be willing to escalate payroll even further for someone like Fielder or Pujols?
Vernon Wells 2011 Stats (.218/.248/.412) and 2010 road stats (.224/.299/.400). The front office shouldn't have been surprised.
Precisely.
This is one of the first things I was wailing about in spring after this went down. We were one year away from Trout and Pujols — it really made no sense. You subtract the $21M owed to Wells this season, add the money coming off the books, and Pujols is not only possible, he’s the obvious choice.
Guys like Trout and Pujols pull fans to the stadium like magnets, and sell a ton of merchandise — Wells could never do that.
So you have a shit economy, the Dodgers at a nadir of popularity and discord, and Arte wanting to sign a big media deal — and you go all in on Wells? Really?
We were one season removed from righting this ship in a big way, and simply dominating the Greater Los Angeles area. It’s shocking how poorly Arte handled this opportunity.
Brutal to even contemplate, but this could’ve been the Angels offense in 2012:
Trout LF
Bourjos CF
Kendrick 2B
Pujols 1B
Beltre 3B
Napoli DH
Hunter RF
Conger C
Aybar SS
With Trumbo and Morales as depth.
by Turks Teeth on Oct 1, 2011 9:47 PM PDT up reply actions 4 recs
I don't see why we can't still do this.
Since none of us are Arte Moreno, none of us have any idea how he feels about how his money was spent. Any discussion about how much was OVER -pent or MIS-spent is only marginally relevant.
It’s just as possible that Arte blames himself for the mistakes over the last few years (hiring Tony, not vetoing the Wells trade) and is willing to spend extra to make up for them. It’s his team; it’s his money.
I’m also a fan Arsenal in the English Premier League. The seats at their stadium are the highest in the league and the team has always brought few established, name players in while allowing stars to leave. That is clearly a situation where fans have the right to ask “What are you doing with all this money?”
With the Angels, there hasn’t been any evidence that Arte won’t open the checkbook for the right player: we signed Vlad, we were willing to sign ARod and Cliff Lee. And don’t talk about what we didn’t do last off season. Carl Crawford wasn’t going to make anyone renew their season tickets. Adrian Beltre isn’t selling any luxury suites.
Captain, there are doubt''s...
You are posting with your heart.
Albert Pujols is a superstar that can electrify any fan base. I’m sure Arte knows this. If he wanted to make a run at Pujols, he NEVER would have taken on even half of Verno’s contract. Arte knows what most of baseball knows: Albert Pujols isn’t leaving St. Louis.
My response to your letter of February 19, 1976, is - kiss my ass.
Sincerely,
Bill Baxley, Attorney General
by sheisalovelyladyandmyapologiestoher on Oct 1, 2011 11:12 PM PDT up reply actions
I agree with this
I don’t think Pujols is leaving either but the argument is that somehow we’re backed into a corner because of some ‘budget’ though no one can provide evidence that it exists.
Captain, there are doubt''s...
The "evidence" is staring you in the face
No, it is not a piece of paper that says “We are going to spend exactly this much this year,” it is a track record that shows zero growth over six years, then a bump up in the 7th. It’s not unreasonable to assume, with this track record, that the owner is not likely to approve another major bump in the 8th.
And it is RIDICULOUS to assume, given that track record, that “money is only marginally relevant” to the decision-making of this organization. Keeping the budget within constraints has been fundamental to this team’s strategy for nearly a decade, as the parade of free agents walking out our door (to be replaced by cheap home-grown talent) has attested.
When your money is tied up in lousy contracts, it constrains you from spending further money on free agents, the draft, and international acquisition, unless you are the New York Yankees or Boston Red Sox.
by mattwelch on Oct 2, 2011 8:06 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Your saying spending money that we don't usually spend
constrains us from spending money we don’t usually spend?
Arte hired Tony, he let him buy Wells, he let him raise the payroll from 115 to 141.
Is there anything, other than our own personal opinions as to what the payroll should be , that says he won’t spend money if the right situation presents itself?
Captain, there are doubt''s...
And let me say,
I agree with you. These are bad mistakes and payroll is too high. But I don’t own the team. I won’t speculate about what’s in Arte’s mind right now.
Captain, there are doubt''s...
What's in Arte's mind is pretty clear
The team is better off with Reagins gone and a new GM leading baseball operations
From Jeff Mathis' TOPPS card: "Jeff is a defensive catcher, but he can rake it when it counts." Jeff has a lifetime .199 MLB batting average
Arte has consistently said payroll above the $130m range puts the team into the red.
Considering the VW trade moved payroll over $140m, all logic indicates that there won’t be further increases in payroll unless Arte issues a new statement that he doesn’t mind losing even more money over the next few years.
He could do it to improve the team’s brand, but we have no reason to believe he will until he actually does.
Vernon Wells 2011 Stats (.218/.248/.412) and 2010 road stats (.224/.299/.400). The front office shouldn't have been surprised.
Exactly
If payroll was already at $115, and we didn’t want to go over $130, then we were never in a position to go after a big splash free agent. Unless money is only “marginally relevant”.
The fact that Arte ok’d the Wells deal indicates, one, we weren’t saving money for anybody, two, Arte’s “budget” isn’t fixed, ie, he spend whatever he wants if his people think it’s necessary.
As long as he’s not passing that cost onto us, what do we care?
Captain, there are doubt''s...
We care that the guy is getting bad advice
Seriously – he takes on a contract that is universally panned as being “unmovable”, but he won’t budge on the contract demands of Beltre?
Certainly not a ringing endorsement of the business acumen of Arte Moreno….
From Jeff Mathis' TOPPS card: "Jeff is a defensive catcher, but he can rake it when it counts." Jeff has a lifetime .199 MLB batting average
That's the point i've been making
It’s Arte’s right to spend what he want’s to spend.
I questioned Matt for speculating, in what was an otherwise, excellent article, well sourced and such, that Arte was somehow upset that too much money was tied up by some bad deals.
It’s not really that big a deal, just guessing and assuming. I didn’t think it need to be there, but, I’m not a writer.
Captain, there are doubt''s...
You assume that since Arte was willing to put the team about $10m into the red for Wells, he'll have no problem going $30m in the red for someone like Pujols or Fielder?
And as for the comment “as long as he’s not passing the cost onto us, what do we care?” – my question is do we want an inexpensive product for the fans or a higher quality product that might cost just a bit more?
Or even better, don’t do dumb shit like VW and we could have an inexpensive, high quality product.
Vernon Wells 2011 Stats (.218/.248/.412) and 2010 road stats (.224/.299/.400). The front office shouldn't have been surprised.
I don't understand-how is the payroll relevant to the fans?
I haven’t seen any evidence so I have no idea if Arte thinks the payroll is above or below what he thinks it should.
It’s his team so if he want’s it to be $500mill, so be it.
What costs are getting passed on to us? If your neighbor buys a day old banana for 10 bucks, do you have a right to call him out on it?
Captain, there are doubt''s...
If you're a fan of your neighbor's fruit and you pay him to watch it, then yeah, you have a right to call him out on it.
For ten bucks, he could have purchased an assortment of high quality fruit for your entertainment rather than a single day old banana.
If higher quality fruit and more of it doesn’t generate greater enjoyment from you, then fine have your single old banana.
I prefer my neighbors to purchase the greatest number of the best pieces of fruit possible. I will not be entertained by one decaying piece and the flies accompanying it.
Vernon Wells 2011 Stats (.218/.248/.412) and 2010 road stats (.224/.299/.400). The front office shouldn't have been surprised.
But were paying the cheapest prices in the league
and there is still no evidence that we’re not still in the market to make improvements to the team. I’m not saying we haven’t made mistakes. I’m just not sure why people seem to think we’re going to keep making them.
Captain, there are doubt''s...
We won't know that until after a new GM is hired.
And as for another payroll escalation, Arte has specifically said in the past that payroll above the $130m range put the team in the red. I won’t believe he wants to add more payroll beyond the $140m it was this year and lose even more money until he does.
Absent an action to do so, there’s no reason to think payroll is going up.
Vernon Wells 2011 Stats (.218/.248/.412) and 2010 road stats (.224/.299/.400). The front office shouldn't have been surprised.
How about the fact that we need significant upgrades
at a few positions?
Captain, there are doubt''s...
How much money do you think Arte is fine losing?
Vernon Wells 2011 Stats (.218/.248/.412) and 2010 road stats (.224/.299/.400). The front office shouldn't have been surprised.
I never made an assertion about Arte one way or the other.
I just asked why other people were making their assertions.
Captain, there are doubt''s...
It's based on an assumption that Arte is okay losing a few million in the short term, but probably not several million.
Vernon Wells 2011 Stats (.218/.248/.412) and 2010 road stats (.224/.299/.400). The front office shouldn't have been surprised.
And while I agree with that
I still don’t think there is anything to be gained by getting worked up about it. It’s his team, he OKs these deals, good and bad. Tony was wrong on Wells and it cost him his job, well, Arte was wrong on Tony and it cost him a lot of money. So be it.
Until the cost of these mistakes prevents us from improving and as long as they aren’t being passed directly on to us, I think they are only marginally relevant to the discussion.
Captain, there are doubt''s...
Well, we'll find out for sure this offseason.
Vernon Wells 2011 Stats (.218/.248/.412) and 2010 road stats (.224/.299/.400). The front office shouldn't have been surprised.
The payroll would've been the same had the trade not been made...
Let’s say they do keep Napoli and Rivera, which is about $9 million I think. Then add the media’s picks for free agency: Crawford, Beltre, and Soriano. What do you think the payroll would be then?
If the Angels match their 2011 payroll in 2012, Wells’ salary only eats up 14%. GMJ and Kazmir’s contracts are coming off the books. That only leaves Wells and Abreu as the only bad contracts. There’s at least another $112 million to sort out there.
All big market teams will have a bad contract or 2.
Are the Dodgers still paying Marquis Grissom?
Actually, had they signed Beltre, payroll would be *more*
By $5.35 million, though that probably would have triggered a trade of Callaspo and his $2 million salary.
It is important to note, however, that though the payroll would have been a tiny bit more than what we paid in 2011, we would also be in the playoffs right now. Which is kind of the point.
That's not certain...
Crawford had a terrible year playing for a team in a hitter’s ballpark. He also guarantees less run production than Wells.
Beltre probably doesn’t have nearly the same numbers playing half his games in a neutral ballpark. Up until September, his road numbers for 2011 were pretty lackluster.
Soriano is the only one of the three I would’ve taken last offseason.
How about some players with good OBP’s, or who provide some real good run production; consistency.
They might have traded Callaspo, they might not. That’s a guy to keep for depth, but who knows?
"what we didn't do last season" was fundamental to what we DID do
Which was make the worst trade in team history.
by mattwelch on Oct 2, 2011 8:08 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
But what do you know that allows you to speculate about what we will do?
Captain, there are doubt''s...
I honestly don't think Pujols has ever been in play for the Angels, even before the Wells acquisition.
If they were saving all their resources for Albert, they would not have tried so hard to make a run at Crawford and Beltre. Arte wanted to win now, and he was foolish enough to let TR convince him that Crawford then Beltre then Vernon Wells would do the job.
Pujols to the Angels was always just a pipe dream.
My response to your letter of February 19, 1976, is - kiss my ass.
Sincerely,
Bill Baxley, Attorney General
by sheisalovelyladyandmyapologiestoher on Oct 1, 2011 11:05 PM PDT up reply actions
Arte has been repeatedly willing to expend 18-22M on players...
…who are too old, less valuable, for too many years. He offered $160M to Teixeira only a few years ago. I don’t see why he wouldn’t lay down cash for an even larger superstar, and with the right GM, you could lure Pujols here.
I really do think the long-term planning simply wasn’t there, and they got caught up in a catastrophic panic last year.
You're right.
Yet Arte seems to always have a limit to what he is willing to spend. I seem to remember him telling the media last Winter that he wasn’t willing to raise ticket prices to the level they would have to be raised in order to land some of the free agents that were on the market.
Before Verno, possibly, but to have a payroll in excess of 170 million dollars…I doubt it.
My response to your letter of February 19, 1976, is - kiss my ass.
Sincerely,
Bill Baxley, Attorney General
by sheisalovelyladyandmyapologiestoher on Oct 1, 2011 11:29 PM PDT up reply actions
Agree
There has not been a strategy in the truest sense of the word since Reagin has been the GM. Arte shares in the blame since he allowed it to occur.
From Jeff Mathis' TOPPS card: "Jeff is a defensive catcher, but he can rake it when it counts." Jeff has a lifetime .199 MLB batting average
?
u have a lot of strike outs with your number one and two man. Bourjos strikes out too much and I dont even know if Trout will be ready next year to produce. Needs to just mature and cut down on his strike outs.
by ca1forniaangels on Oct 4, 2011 12:29 PM PDT up reply actions
No, it does not imply that.
With $133 million payroll for 2011 instead of $142, and the money that’s coming off the books this winter, we would have been in a position to afford a superstar free agent this winter.
I really don’t understand the persistent mentality that money doesn’t matter. If money didn’t matter, payroll would be $200 million, instead of $142 million after being flat for six consecutive years.
Money ALWAYS matters
some sayings – “Follow the money” & “It’s the Economy stupid”—- money is the driving force. Arte didn’t buy the team on a whim and for shits and giggles. This is a business. Business is about bottom line no matter what you are selling.
Business is down but you’ve allocated more resources than we ever have before. Also our customers are clamoring for your ass.—-Your fired!
How come when players go to Texas they revitalize their careers? could it be the roids?
by Sinatrasratpack on Oct 2, 2011 11:14 AM PDT up reply actions
Yes, it's a business
But owning a Major League franchise in any sport is another toy for billionaires. Arte did not buy the Angels with the intent the franchise was going to put food on the table for his family. Yes, he wants the business to perform well. Yes, he wants his investment to appreciate in value. However, the guy was not eating chicken-backs and beans before the Halos.
From Jeff Mathis' TOPPS card: "Jeff is a defensive catcher, but he can rake it when it counts." Jeff has a lifetime .199 MLB batting average
they do buy them as money making toys-
but no one, not even billionaires, enjoy losing money.
How come when players go to Texas they revitalize their careers? could it be the roids?
by Sinatrasratpack on Oct 2, 2011 7:06 PM PDT up reply actions
Darn.
Don't Blame ME! Tony Reagins Did it!
by IWishWeStillHadTimSalmon on Oct 2, 2011 11:33 AM PDT reply actions
Great work-
Nice analysis and kind of hard to argue with the conclusion. We need a GM that will take personnel decisions away from Scioscia and make them on the basis of clear, cold, rigorous analysis.
Napoli had not role on this team when that trade was made!
Unless I missed it, Kendrys Morales is not mentioned in this article, neither are Trumbo, Conger, Wilson, or Abreu.
How about we talk about the difference in wins due to Morales absence? Or how about we talk about the positions that people still think Napoli would be playing for the Halos?
Morales was projected to return as well when that deal was made, and Trumbo was ready to come and fill in if Morales needed days off. And look what Trumbo ended up bringing.
Scratch 1B.
Conger and Wilson were ready to move forward, and Napoli didn’t work hard enough to take the catcher’s job in the first place.
For the most part, scratch C.
Wells was inserted into LF to stabilize the position, especially at defense, in place of Rivera, which also moved Abreu to full time DH. Had Morales played, Trumbo would be filling in at 1B and would also be finding AB’s at DH as well.
Scratch DH.
It’s a good article with a lot of information, but it still doesn’t tell me exactly what Napoli would be doing for this team if he had not received the big kick in the ass he deserved when he was traded.
I like Napoli. I met him at a bar. He’s a cool guy. But there were issues between he and Scioscia, and he wasn’t working hard enough behind the plate, and he got the boot.
That’s why Napoli rocked this year. He finally stepped up.
Btw, Reagins could’ve gone out and got some offensive depth to replace any voids left by that trade. He could have easily acquired a couple of good bench players, especially one who could make production look better out of the corner OF positions before Trout was to be called up.
I think people are dwelling on this Napoli issue way too much, and for the wrong reasons.
I think it’s time to move on, especially now that our GM is finally gone!
Your analysis of Napoli is 100 percent wrong.
Your analysis of Napoli is 100 percent wrong.
Claiming he didnt work hard enough to compete with conger and wilson is ludicrous. From what i have read, Napoli ranks among the top of the league which is where his so called "need-for-improvement" was needed. His framing of pitches ranked well ahead of Mathis and the halo battery crew. As of now, Wilson hasnt stepped up and is just barely an improvement of Mathis. Conger is deserving of a shot but I would have gladly traded him were Napoli still with us.
Napoli would have been a dangerous weapon in the lineup, one that would have surely won us the Wild Card if not the West.
From no where I read stated that Napoli changed workout regiments or "stepped it up" He has always been the beast he was this year. The reason his cERA is improved over previous years is because of who he is catching, not him. As most of us recall he caught Pineiro, Kazmir, and Santana. Not to bash on Pinata or Santana, I love to watch them, but they arent of the caliber that Haren and Weaver are (at least not last year, Santana is making his case stronger every outing). Nobody could expect a decent CERA out of that. His improvement is much more based on his utilization instead of his personal stepping up.
You cant say he didnt work hard either. He went into a position he had never played before or had little experience in 2010 and emerged with a new position under his belt. He improved on his defense and WORKED so hard that he supplied acceptable defense, that I would even compare to our full time first baseman, Trumbo.
People are right to dwell on the trading of Napoli, it was the worst trade in recent history. Losing a player the caliber of Napoli is crushing to an organization and crushing to the fanbase. Most of us can easily agree Napoli was one of if not the best catchers in the game currently. Better than Avila, Yadier, Mauer.
Alas, we should indeed rejoice on the firing of Reagins and should pray for the return of Napoli next off-season. He is a true game changer, definitely on e of the best Halos of recent times.
" With Haren bolstering the rotation, the Angels are set up beautifully for 2011"- Another East coast biased reporter
by Halos2011champs on Oct 2, 2011 1:31 PM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
Shoulda Coulda Woulda
That’s all based on hindsight.
The issue should be Napoli’s role at the time that trade was made, and his relationship with Scioscia.
There’s a reason the Jays traded him as well.
Also, the only reason Napoli had a job with the Rangers to give him enough AB’s to hit 30 HR’s is because Beltre and Cruz were hurt for quite a while.
And the Rangers still acquired Matt Treanor.
Where do they put Napoli if Beltre and Cruz stay healthy?
A guy like Napoli sitting on the bench? Exactly what he’d be doing with the Angels if Morales returned with Trumbo as the back up.
And no, Napoli was never as good as he was in 2011.
I was fine with trading Napoli then, and I’m still fine with it.
There are many more players out there that Reagins should’ve acquired to maintain offensive depth.
Where would he be?
Catcher. His position, also our biggest offensive hole. The reason the Jays traded him is because of their need for bullpen help. And it didnt work out for them. Beltre and cruz both play positions Napoli has never even sniffed. Their injuries affect Napoli’s playing marginally at most.
As firebird states, he was a fan favorite. Just because we get angry with him doesnt mean we love him. We love Tori, Howie, Trumbo, Walden, Bourjos, and Aybar but hey have made us upset from time to time. The reason he was trade was a horrible judgement of talent which ultimately cost the man his job.
This thread is based on hindsight, on the worst trade ever. Therefore it is appropriate to recap. There is no reason Napoli should not have been a Halo in 2011, helping us beat the Rays or Rangers in the ALDS right now. There is no reason we shouldnt want him back for the life of us.
" With Haren bolstering the rotation, the Angels are set up beautifully for 2011"- Another East coast biased reporter
by Halos2011champs on Oct 2, 2011 2:01 PM PDT up reply actions
He would NOT be at catcher!!!
Scioscia would not let him catch! There’s a reason for that. If Napoli had taken his job behind the plate more seriously, he’d have the catching job, and Mathis would either just be the back up and Conger and Wilson become trade bait.
The injuries Beltre and Cruz went through opened up AB’s at 1B and DH because Young was able to return to 3B, which also opened up more AB’s at DH, and plus Cruz DH’s from time to time as well.
Napoli had 5 seasons under his belt, and was pushing 29. That’s way too long to wait for a power hitter’s full potential to come around. The Rangers got lucky.
There are many reasons why Napoli is not a Halo.
Shoulda coulda woulda. Blah blah blah.
There are many other players out there.
Napoli had no role on this team at the time he was traded.
No you're not
The issue should be Napoli’s role at the time that trade was made, and his relationship with Scioscia.
Unless you’re relying on the hindsight you’re accusing others of using.
YES I AM!
Morales projected to return at 1B.
Abreu projected to DH full time.
Napoli, Mathis, Conger, Wilson all competing for the C job.
All in 2011!
You know I was quoting you right?
Here’s another:
Napoli had no role on this team at the time he was traded.140 games is a lot of playing time for someone who had “no role” on this team.
By this same logic, Napoli had “no role” with the Rangers.
by linkbruin on Oct 2, 2011 4:28 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Then Beltre and Cruz got hurt...
That moved Young back to 3B, which opened up AB’s at 1B and definitely opened more AB’s at DH.
That’s how Napoli got his playing time.
None of us can say what the Rangers would do with Napoli had Beltre and Cruz stayed off the DL.
I can just guess they could’ve package him for a starting pitcher or bullpen help, which is what they really needed.
Easy to fix the logjam at catcher-
If we still had Nap, dump Mathis for whatever you can get, stash Wilson at SLC, and give Conger some more time to develop.The key is not trading good players for crap, and not keeping crap you already have.
by Jimatkins on Oct 2, 2011 5:24 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
I get the idea
But Mathis would have simply been a non-tender. Wilson had to be on the major league roster or he was gone. But yeah, if they don’t make the deal, Naps & Wilson share catching duties. Conger develops at AAA, and Mathis perhaps signs a minor league contract with someone else.
He would certainly be at catcher.
Scioscia himself declared the catching position to be a pitfall for offense. Having a weapon such as Napoli solves the dilemma Scioscia himself stated. You have no evidence to say he didnt take his job seriously. He is the same catcher as he was. Again, just better utilized.
Napoli played the majority of his games at the catcher position for Texas. Those injuries affected him little. What other power hitting, CERA league leading, versatile cathcer could Reagins have had? None. Napoli had a prominent role on the team, which is why we reacted so fiercely at the trade at the time.
" With Haren bolstering the rotation, the Angels are set up beautifully for 2011"- Another East coast biased reporter
by Halos2011champs on Oct 2, 2011 2:23 PM PDT up reply actions
Please note that my comparison had Napoli catching just 61 games for the Angels
Already, that would have been an enormous difference.
by mattwelch on Oct 2, 2011 3:37 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
He WOULD be at catcher
He averaged 85 games/yr at catcher from 2007-2009. He had started 38 games at catcher in 2010 before Morales broke his leg, on pace for 114.
"There's nothing that cleanses your soul like getting the hell kicked out of you." - Woody Hayes
by johnnyangel101 on Oct 2, 2011 3:38 PM PDT up reply actions
No.
Hes saying Scioscia would have let him catch though. Those numbers suggest he would have only gotten a few less starts than he had this year at catcher.
" With Haren bolstering the rotation, the Angels are set up beautifully for 2011"- Another East coast biased reporter
by Halos2011champs on Oct 2, 2011 4:12 PM PDT up reply actions
Scioscia was already letting him catch.
Definitely not as much as we wanted, especially since Mathis is a waste of a jersey, but he was catching.
OK, now you're just being an idiot.
"There's nothing that cleanses your soul like getting the hell kicked out of you." - Woody Hayes
by johnnyangel101 on Oct 2, 2011 4:25 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
I think that Ryan Krol guy, is tony Reagins posting on here to save his Rep
How come when players go to Texas they revitalize their careers? could it be the roids?
by Sinatrasratpack on Oct 2, 2011 7:10 PM PDT up reply actions
Explain!
Scioscia had a lot of issues with Napoli’s catching. How does it not register that Scioscia probably gives Napoli less and less playing time behind the plate? Let’s check some facts before we start calling people idiot.
Because there's no Mathis
He gets non-tendered, leaving Napoli & Wilson as the two catchers (with maybe some Conger mixed in).
Have you checked them yet?
It would show that, as stated above, Napoli would get plenty of PT. What exactly do you need to check that hasn’t been presented to you?
by lightupthehalo29 on Oct 3, 2011 12:29 AM PDT up reply actions
The Napoli issue will not go away.
He was a fan favorite. Still is. I always viewed Naps as supplemental power, more than the kind of power you build a team around. I never really bought the story that he was worse behind the plate than Mathis. I would ahve much rather they got rid of Mathis. I was pissed when he was traded, but from a baseball point of view I didn’t think the onfield loss was really that much. I expected Wells to produce enough to make up for losing Naps, while filling a bad need in left field….well, he didn’t, did he? We all knew he was WAYYY to expensive, And now we see a Mike Napoli who looks like Mike Piazza, while Wells looks like Reggie Jackson in his final couple seasons……and, that hurts. As long as we have to watch our division rival trot Naps out there day after day while we trot Mathis out and Wells is hitting .220…….the Napoli issue will not go away.
Are you sure he was that much of a fan favorite?
Lots and lots of fans were tired of him not hitting in the clutch. And some of those same fans have back peddled and suddenly want him back. Well, I’ll say it again: there is a reason he was traded.
I'm with you on this
Lose 20 homers, gain 20 homers and damn good defense in left field. If Wells hit .280 and Conger hit .240 while Napoli had a career average year, this could have helped the team win the West; albiet at a great financial cost (which would have been partieally offest by playoff revenue).
Everything that could possibly go wrong with this trade did. Naps crushed it for a division rival, Sosh jerked Conger around and ran Mathis out night after night, and Wells pressed.
You have it backwards
It’s not Mike Napoli’s fault that he had “no role on the team”. It’s the Angels’ fault for not making a role for him.
by Suboptimal on Oct 2, 2011 1:54 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Not for a guy who is 29 and is lagging...
Napoli is a power hitter who didn’t start playing to his potential until he was 29. That’s a red flag.
Napolis power has been constant.
The difference between last years and this years HR total are close. So close n fact that playing in Arlington probably accounts for the few extra home runs he hit. He didnt magically become a better player. The differences between him now and last year are too little to recognize.
" With Haren bolstering the rotation, the Angels are set up beautifully for 2011"- Another East coast biased reporter
by Halos2011champs on Oct 2, 2011 2:26 PM PDT up reply actions
Are you sure about that?
4 more HR, 13 more RBI, and 98 points higher in 27 fewer games (113) than last season (140 games). He actually stepped it up in a humungous way, at 29. What about age 26?And he still has yet to prove he can maintain that over a full 162 game season. 85 is still his 162 average in RBI’s. The differences are humungous.
Use his environment as a factor.
Use his protection as a factor. You make it seem like Napoli wasnt a good player at all until now. Even then he was in the top tier of catchers. Now in the confines of the Arlington band box, surrounded by one of the most feared lineups in baseball, of course his numbers will be better. His numbers would resemble his numbers from last year much more were he in Anaheim, and that would still be good. Here he was our most feared hitter, there he’s right at home slugging. His improvement is more attributed to his lineup protection and environment than personal gains.
" With Haren bolstering the rotation, the Angels are set up beautifully for 2011"- Another East coast biased reporter
by Halos2011champs on Oct 2, 2011 2:51 PM PDT up reply actions
If he was at the top tier of catchers he'd be playing 140 games a year 3 years ago...
I never said he wasn’t a good player. I talk about his development. 29 is too old to be hoping for a break out year.
Who said they were waiting for a break out year?
Face it, Napoli didnt need a breakout year, HE ALREADY BROKE OUT. Name 5 catchers better than Napoli and Ill agree that he isnt top Tier. He is/was/will be top tier. His development wasnt being watched. He was a productive Major League Player, one of the best at his position. Considering how late he was drafted, nobody expected him to break out but he did anyway.
" With Haren bolstering the rotation, the Angels are set up beautifully for 2011"- Another East coast biased reporter
by Halos2011champs on Oct 2, 2011 4:16 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I think of Napoli as more of a 1B/DH type player
He’s never played a full season at C. He could have, but he hasen’t.
And when has he ever broken out?
A player with Napoli’s power should be playing full seasons and hitting 30 HR’s 3 years ago.
Trumbo hit 29 in his rookie year.
So he should have been traded because he didn't meet your completely arbitrary standards of what he should have been doing?
He was already a good player. It’s not like he was a 29 year old Brandon Wood.
The fact that the Angels had worse players ahead of him on the depth chart for some awful reason isn’t Napoli’s fault.
by ~MMP~ on Oct 2, 2011 4:33 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Trumbo and Napoli are different players.
Mike Napoli had two, I repeat two impressive power seasons. The rest were pretty poor. He had never hit above .290 either.
On the contrary, Mark Trumbo had 3 Fantastic power seasons, 4 above average power seasons, and only one poor power season. Mark hit above 290 on a couple occasions and was in our top ten Prospects, and led the minors in HR last year
To me, those are two separate players you cant even compare.
It doesnt matter what you think, nobody cares what your standards are as a player. He has caught much more than his 1B/DH playing time. Thats a really poor argument to make.
Claiming that Trumbo hit 29 bombs his rookie year is really irrevalent. Tim Salmom hit 31. Jose Bautista hit lots this year. It doesnt matter.
For a player with as low as expectations as Napoli had and to hit at least 20+ homeruns each season is a breakout.
" With Haren bolstering the rotation, the Angels are set up beautifully for 2011"- Another East coast biased reporter
by Halos2011champs on Oct 2, 2011 4:38 PM PDT up reply actions
So he wasn't playing up to his potential, and still put had an .831 OPS as an Angel?
For some reason I’m okay with that “red flag”
by ~MMP~ on Oct 2, 2011 4:02 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
He couldn't hit in the clutch
And that’s a widely known fact about Napoli, and is the reason why a lot of fans wanted him out. If he was so great then why wasn’t he also getting AB’s at 1B and DH before 2010?
I don't over emphasize BA w/ RISP...
But his was terrible. He could’ve driven in so many more runs for the Angels, especially in the most key situations, and he didn’t. Why wasn’t he getting AB’s at 1B and DH before 2010 if his bat is so valuable?
That sounds like a better question for Scioscia.
Morales performed well enough in 2009 that there really wasn’t reason to play anyone else there.
I would have rather had Napoli as the backup/platoon 1B over Quinlan at that point though.
He also got some DH ABs before 2010 as well. Not a lot, but some.
He was also playing about half the time as a catcher as well for most of his Angels career.
Napoli choked in critical situations last year for two reasons:
1) Mike Scioscia – who critized his every move, and
2) Mickey Hatcher, who had him so confused at the plate that his swing started to look unnatural.
A wise man does not need advice and a fool won't take it.
by angelslogic on Oct 2, 2011 8:17 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Naps couldn't hit in the clutch...
Mathis couldn’t hit at ANY TIME.
I love this team.
by Downing Rules on Oct 3, 2011 4:40 PM PDT up reply actions
And Mathis/WIlson cant hit. Period.
" With Haren bolstering the rotation, the Angels are set up beautifully for 2011"- Another East coast biased reporter
by Halos2011champs on Oct 2, 2011 4:22 PM PDT up reply actions
And this.
Mathis has had way too many major league ABs to prove he doesn’t belong.
It’s not like Wilson had much in his track record either.
Ask Mike Scioscia, not us. He's the dumbshit on that one.
A wise man does not need advice and a fool won't take it.
He was under/mis Utilized
As its been stated multiple times. Your shifting your argument from Napoli to management.
" With Haren bolstering the rotation, the Angels are set up beautifully for 2011"- Another East coast biased reporter
by Halos2011champs on Oct 2, 2011 4:59 PM PDT up reply actions
dude, you don't know very much.
Naps power numbers have always been consistent. Just like Mathis and his lack of numbers have been consistent. This isn’t a ‘hindsight’ issue. Very few people not only here but in the national media thought the trade was a desperate move, and one that we didn’t get our moneys worth on.
Forget what you THINK Napolis stats as an Angel would be in 2011, the FACT is that his stats on our rival team was good.
And for you to say he never took his job seriously? Damn… he did pretty good as an Angel without taking it seriously. The trade not only meant less production from DH and Catcher for us (no matter what you think his numbers would have been, it would have been better that Abreus DH numbers and what we got from catcher position), but MORE AB’s for his lesser counterparts. Meaning even if his playing time remained at a constant from 2010 playing time, it is still more production that we got, Also that means our rivals GOT that production from those positions.
It is like two cars going 50 MPH towards each other… It is actually 100MPH. we lost production for us and gave that production to a rival-double whammy—- Also might I add, adding significantly to our payroll keeping us from possibly making other moves to help the team
How come when players go to Texas they revitalize their careers? could it be the roids?
by Sinatrasratpack on Oct 2, 2011 7:16 PM PDT up reply actions
Actually I do know quite a bit...
And the trade being “supposedly” desperate has nothing to do with trading Napoli. That’s about Wells.
Do you know anything about the deals Reagins apparently had in place for Beltran and Soriano at the time? It may not have been such a desperate move.
Hmm… I keep having to repeat about Napoli not meeting Scioscia’s expectations.
Do I still have to keep asking why Napoli couldn’t get significant playing time before 2010?
And no I’m going to stick to the numbers Napoli would’ve put up as an Angel. They wouldn’t be close. And any player can go to the Rangers and look like a superstar.
Have you seen the individual road splits for the Rangers?
I'm sure most of us have seen them. I'm guessing you haven't Napoli's road splits though.
He’s actually hit BETTER on the road than in Arlington this year.
So that argument really doesn’t work.
That argument does work, really well actually...
You just threw Napoli into it as if I was saying every player on the Rangers had bad road numbers. Actually, Napoli was terrible on the road until he started getting hot in late June/early July. But he ended up hitting very well on the road. So I have seen them, very thorough. The rest of the team’s road splits (minus Young) boggled my mind for most of the year, especially Kinsler, Beltre, and Cruz. Just about everyone on that team got hot though in the final 2 weeks. Maybe he would hit better than he had as Angel in 2011, maybe not. But at the time that trade was made, the feeling was that he would not.
So what a player does for half the season doesn't matter?
You even say that he hit better on the road, so you refute your own po
Rule one - don't ask a question if you do not know the answer.
Rule two: knopw when to fold ’em.
A wise man does not need advice and a fool won't take it.
Here it is for you
Have you seen the individual road splits for the Rangers
That question was an insult to most posters here. Even me, and I’m not a stathead.
A wise man does not need advice and a fool won't take it.
100% agree with Suboptimal
In a former life, I coached many years as a HS football coach. I was fortunate enough to coach with some of the best coaches in the southland – guys that win (and are still winning) championships. I won’t name them – I don’t want to embarass them by being associated with me and this message board :)
But there is one head coach in particular (who is still at a dominant Catholic school) who I worked with who stands out. Every Sunday, we went over every single player on the team, starters and backups. Every. Single. One. How can this kid get better? Where should he play? What unique talent does he have to fill a specialty role? Who can he push for a job. Should he be demoted? And on and on.
It was our goal to get our best 11 on the field as much as possible – offense, defense, and special teams. It was hard work. It got boring and repetitive sometimes. But we continued to do it. And it paid dividends.
SO – It’s fine if Napoli couldn’t catch full time. But you can’t tell me that, with a little effort and ingenuity, we couldn’t have found 425-450 PA’s (or more) for the guy. Scioscia did an excellent job mixing of in Izturis this year – he could have done the same with Napoli at C, 1B, and DH.
"There's nothing that cleanses your soul like getting the hell kicked out of you." - Woody Hayes
by johnnyangel101 on Oct 2, 2011 2:24 PM PDT up reply actions
Not with Conger, Wilson, Trumbo, and Morales
All 4 were projected to get playing time in 2011 when that trade was made. And I’m tired of repeating the issues between Napoli and Scioscia at the C position. It’s not about the year Napoli had, it’s about his role at the time he was traded, his relationship with Scioscia, why he didn’t have a role, why the Angels were fed up with waiting for him to play to his potential, and the fact that there are plenty of other players out there to fill in the spaces when the team needed depth. The Angels losing their biggest bat for another season; failing to act on having a rookie closer leading the AL in blown saves; and waiting until August to finally make sure there was good depth on the bench are the main reasons they finished in second place. Not Mike Napoli.
You're COMPLETELY missing my point
First of all, you are incorrect. Conger and Trumbo were NOT projected to get much playing time in 2011. Both were considered long shots to make the team in spring training. Trumbo was in the lineup, theoretically, until Morales returned. It was a surprise that Conger wasn’t optioned to AAA when the opening day rosters were announced. Neither was being counted on at the time of The Trade. At all.
To say Wilson was projected to get playing time? Well, even with The Trade, he only started 7 times the entire 1st half of the season. So that, too, is incorrect.
But back to my point:
Napoli was an asset. Good coaches/managers find out what you CAN do, not what you CAN’T do. And then find a way to use you.
Napoli’s asset was his bat. A catcher with a career OPS+ of 119. Pretty valuable. And although his defense has been argued, we can all agree that it wasn’t completely horrible, or Scioscia NEVER would have played him. The guy averaged 85 games/yr as our catcher from 2007-2009.
Even WITH the guys you mentioned, and more, you could still find a role for Napoli. Part time catcher, part time First Baseman, part time DH. Insurance policy to all. Heck, some people here on Halos Heaven even broached the idea of moving Napoli to LF last year, a la Brian Downing. Too extreme for my tastes, but, hey, at least people were thinking.
Yes, not having Morales hurt our chances, and blowing so many saves didn’t help. But to suggest that the Angels couldn’t have found a use for Napoli is silly.
"There's nothing that cleanses your soul like getting the hell kicked out of you." - Woody Hayes
by johnnyangel101 on Oct 2, 2011 3:32 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Then what do you do with Trumbo?
Sooner or later Trumbo was going to push his way in.
I doubt Scioscia would let Napoli catch 140 games.
Make a trade?
I feel like I'm arguing with my wife
I never said that Napoli would catch 140 games. Ever. You’re twisting and making stuff up just to prove your un-provable point. Just so you can win.
And your wasting my time. Which is my fault.
“OK, honey, you’re right. Napoli’s no good and I’m glad we traded him. Can I get back to watching the football game?”
"There's nothing that cleanses your soul like getting the hell kicked out of you." - Woody Hayes
by johnnyangel101 on Oct 2, 2011 4:45 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Go ahead and watch football.
We have this covered.
" With Haren bolstering the rotation, the Angels are set up beautifully for 2011"- Another East coast biased reporter
by Halos2011champs on Oct 2, 2011 5:00 PM PDT up reply actions
I asked you a question...
The way you talked about Conger and Wilson, and knowing Mathis’ offensive shortcomings, implies the need for a full time catcher.
Which the Angels had but were too stupid to realize.
Are you implying they should have tried to trade for a catcher and one of the pieces in the trade would have been Mike Napoli? This is a better alternative to everything else you’ve said, but often the simplest solution is the best.
You have Mike Napoli, a catcher. Play him and reap the benefits. And no, he won’t get 140 games, but to also imply that Trumbo would push Napoli out of the lineup (with his average defense and less productive bat) is astoundingly stupid.
by lightupthehalo29 on Oct 2, 2011 5:19 PM PDT up reply actions
This guy is delusional.
Dude, you aren’t listening to the arguments (Ryan Krol).
Even if Scioscia only plays NAPs at the EXACT SAME amount as previous year and his AB’s and starts ARE UNCHANGED. it is still more production than we got and we gave that production away. And got a less productive player that makes 5 times the money on a longer contract
How come when players go to Texas they revitalize their careers? could it be the roids?
by Sinatrasratpack on Oct 2, 2011 7:21 PM PDT up reply actions
Halowood on line 1
This guys a pesky little poster isn’t he?
My response to your letter of February 19, 1976, is - kiss my ass.
Sincerely,
Bill Baxley, Attorney General
by sheisalovelyladyandmyapologiestoher on Oct 2, 2011 10:28 PM PDT up reply actions
Your wife sounds awful.
Vernon Wells 2011 Stats (.218/.248/.412) and 2010 road stats (.224/.299/.400). The front office shouldn't have been surprised.
Ha! She's really not
She’s wonderful. But have you ever argued with a woman about anything? How does it usually end, if it ever does?
Exactly.
Which is how I felt dealing with RyAn Krol. Fight or flight. I chose the latter.
"There's nothing that cleanses your soul like getting the hell kicked out of you." - Woody Hayes
by johnnyangel101 on Oct 2, 2011 10:21 PM PDT up reply actions
No
Sooner or later Trumbo was going to push his way in.
If this is your logic, Why didnt Mike trout force Vernon Wells out of LF.
When Arguing, using the pronoun “I” Is very counter productive and takes away from your point.
" With Haren bolstering the rotation, the Angels are set up beautifully for 2011"- Another East coast biased reporter
by Halos2011champs on Oct 2, 2011 4:55 PM PDT up reply actions
When arguing...
Stick to the argument.
Trout forcing Wells out of LF would be ridiculous at that point, even now.
Trumbo obviously was going to provide some power. So where do you find AB’s for Napoli if Trumbo suddenly proves he can drive in runs everyday, even with Napoli still here?
Napoli never drove in 87 runs. And Trumbo did in his rookie year.
Scioscia wouldn’t let him catch everyday.
Scioscia took until August to reduce Abreu’s role at DH.
What role does Napoli play if Trumbo broke into the lineup anyways?
You're now using RBIs in your argument? Seriously?
As far as a role for Napoli:
- Catcher about half the time, like he was for most of his Angels career(2010 being the exception because of Morales’s injury).
- Part time DH, especially since Abreu’s ability to hit lefties was really coming into question.
- Back-up 1B if Morales was healthy, which would probably get him more ABs than a typical backup 1B because of Morales’s ankle.
OR
Back-up 1B if Morales wasn’t healthy and Trumbo was starting. If Trumbo couldn’t produce(which was a concern for some), you would also have an insurance policy that wasn’t shifting Kendrick to 1B and playing the shortest infield in the league.
Between those 3 positions, he would end up with a decent number of ABs. And perhaps more importantly, he wouldn’t be destroying the ball for the Rangers and ending our postseason hopes.
You're the first person who has given me a thorough explanation about what role Napoli would've had...
And it’s obviously plausible.
But my argument is based more on what Scioscia would do, and the pressing working relationship he had with Napoli.
I see less and less playing time at C based on Napoli’s inability to meet Scioscia’s standards.
1B he could’ve had AB’s, and perhaps Trumbo backs him up, but you can’t say it’s impossible for Trumbo to push his way into the lineup at 1B eventually. Maybe a trade is made then; Halos probably would still need a closer.
DH there was no chance until Scioscia couldn’t defend him anymore for losing his power stroke. But even in August there’s eventually AB’s for Napoli; and perhaps Trumbo becomes full time at 1B with Napoli splitting time with Abreu at DH and still finding AB’s at C.
We’d probably have to give up on the Trout preview, or at least be okay with him sitting on the bench.
I’m just saying that trade was inevitable.
But I’m also saying that better deals could’ve been made other than for Wells, and that Reagins could’ve made other small deals to replace the depth we loss because of it.
You just said this
No one here seems to have a clue about Napoli’s working relationship with Scioscia, which has been documented as being very pressing for Napoli.
So you’ve now decided to base your argument on your opinion of Soth and Nap’s relationship despite this.
Also, this is not the first post to give you a thorough explanation of what Napoli’s role might have been, but for some reason it’s the first you to notice.
As for what you say, no the trade was not inevitable with a competent GM who would have more control of who’s on the roster (Napoli and not Mathis for instance).
Also, saying that better smaller deals could be made to replace the loss of depth is not even worth mentioning, as almost everyone realizes the Wells trade is one of the worst in baseball history. Of course a different move would have been better, in the same way starting someone besides Mathis at catcher would have been better.
by lightupthehalo29 on Oct 2, 2011 6:31 PM PDT up reply actions
My opinion of Sosh and Napoli's working relationship?
That’s not an opinion it’s a documented fact. Napoli couldn’t meet Scioscia’s expectations and Napoli would often press on the field.
And that’s been the basis of my opinion regarding his catching the whole time.
The trade was inevitable. It happened!
Small moves to shore up the depth definitely could’ve been made, and one of them was made: Russell Branyan.
Jose Lopez could have been acquired.
Those aren’t great moves but the team eventually was in dire need of production off the bench.
So yes, better deals could have been made; the trade was inevitable; and some depth could have been acquired.
I agree with you in one respect.
Papa Sosh probably wasn’t a Napoli fan. A better deal could have been made if they had just swapped Juan Rivera for Vernon Wells. They didn’t need Napoli to get that deal done. They dumped Napoli, which makes the trade that more egregious.
My response to your letter of February 19, 1976, is - kiss my ass.
Sincerely,
Bill Baxley, Attorney General
by sheisalovelyladyandmyapologiestoher on Oct 2, 2011 10:34 PM PDT up reply actions
Youre talkng in circles.
How was Trumbo going to obviously provide power? Brandon wood was a bigger minor league monster and he fails to produce. You cant bank the future on the past.
How does Trumbo even break ito the scene, let alone prove he can continuosly provide production if he is still cofined to a part time role? He doesnt.
Youre again comparing Napoli and Trumbo. Take the time to review the replies i give you, you will see that it is completely useless to compare them and doesnt support your argument.
What does Abreus playing time have to do with anything? You are throwig out useless, random statements that degrade your argument and that are making you look foolish. Stop restating things that have already been answered and won. If Sosh doesnt let him catch every day, he plays elsewhere. Mark trumbo didnt play 1st every day. Abreu didnt DH everyday.
" With Haren bolstering the rotation, the Angels are set up beautifully for 2011"- Another East coast biased reporter
by Halos2011champs on Oct 2, 2011 5:39 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
No I think you're just trying to twist my words around...
I could have easily insulted a few people like that, but I didn’t. I even complimented the writer on his information. But you’re going to just flat out insult my arguments? I don’t want to review the replies you give me.
The fact that you ask what does Abreu’s playing time have to do with anything tells me you don’t get it at all.
That’s a spot for Napoli right there, dude. But Scioscia is not going to let Abreu become a part time player out of thin air.
I’m basing my argument on what Scioscia would do. Not what I think they should do, or what I want them to do. But what Scioscia would do. Why do I even have to explain that?
So with that, there is no reason for me to believe Napoli ever had a role with the Angels.
Trading him was inevitable.
But better deals could have been made, which I have said a few times before already.
And that’s where this fan post comes in.
I would’ve liked to know from the writer what he thinks about what better deals could have been made, whether it be this fanpost or another fanpost by the writer.
Youre original statement said Napoli didnt work hard enough to keep his job agains Wilson and conger
And that he wouldnt have found playing. From more than several posters you have been proved wrong. Napoli would have found playing time, just as he had in years past. To say this trade was inevitable is false. Any sensible GM who could evsluate talenr would have never traded him. Were he here he would have played as much as he did in texas.
" With Haren bolstering the rotation, the Angels are set up beautifully for 2011"- Another East coast biased reporter
by Halos2011champs on Oct 2, 2011 6:31 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Since you like to use a condescending tone...
Then if you don’t think that trade as inevitable then you have no idea what is going on with your own team.
Wait… the trade actually did happen.
It must have been inevitable. DUH!
Uhh...what?
This makes no sense. Just because something happens does not make it an inevitable occurrence…not even in hindsight. Jesus christ dude.
Stick to the topic.
Was the vernon wells trade inevitable? No. It was a extreme surprise and was so unlikely. But it happened. Was the Boston red sox trip to October inevitable? The Rays 2% playoff chance in september would beg to differ. To claim i have no idea whats going on with my own team bogus.
" With Haren bolstering the rotation, the Angels are set up beautifully for 2011"- Another East coast biased reporter
by Halos2011champs on Oct 2, 2011 6:53 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
I was sticking to the topic
Now you can’t even make a good argument and have to throw dumb questions in there.
Napoli and Rivera were both as good as gone.
It was all over the place. People were pissed about the Angels sticking with too many guys like them, and wanted them out.
I felt a Napoli trade coming from mid-season 2010.
I felt a Rivera trade coming from mid-season 2010.
Someone was getting traded. And when that trade happened, it made all the sense in the world that those two went.
And a lot of people felt that way.
I wonder how many of those people have back peddled.
When two comments lay paralell to eachother as bruins does to mine
Its not generally a bad argument. You arent sticking to the topic at all. Youre nitpicking my posts and veering from the argument. This is about Napoli, not Rivera. You initially claimed he didnt work hard enough and couldnt earn his at bats. Really, napoli’s work ethic remains the same in texas. He easily had the available at bats. He could catch most of the time, and spell Morales/Trumbo and Abreu at 1st and DH. You say Scioscia wouldnt play him at Catcher. Really, he has played the majority of his time at Catcher, all while improving defensively and posting solid offensive numbers. It makes no sense that Napoli was traded for wells. None whatsoever, especially when the same player was on waivers for FREE, months earlier.
" With Haren bolstering the rotation, the Angels are set up beautifully for 2011"- Another East coast biased reporter
by Halos2011champs on Oct 2, 2011 7:28 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
You havent repeated anything that was a solid fact.
Just opinions that have low debate value. Its okay to be wrong, halospace needs maintaining anyways.
" With Haren bolstering the rotation, the Angels are set up beautifully for 2011"- Another East coast biased reporter
by Halos2011champs on Oct 2, 2011 7:45 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Stronger case>weaker case
" With Haren bolstering the rotation, the Angels are set up beautifully for 2011"- Another East coast biased reporter
by Halos2011champs on Oct 2, 2011 8:26 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
It wasn't surprising, but it didn't make sense.
Nothing about that Wells trade made sense.
Not quite
Did the front office expect an offensive upgrade with Wells versus Rivera and Napoli? Even if they were stupid enough to think that, to trade for a man who would cock block their top prospect and hamstring their budget for four years is absolutely the antithesis of making sense.
My response to your letter of February 19, 1976, is - kiss my ass.
Sincerely,
Bill Baxley, Attorney General
by sheisalovelyladyandmyapologiestoher on Oct 2, 2011 10:39 PM PDT up reply actions
Let's roll back the clock to January
At that time, Mike Napoli was .251 / .346 / .485 career hitter in over 500 games. That line is good enough to hold up at any position—outfield, DH, 1B, whatever. It’s damn good for a catcher. You’re going to get production from that bat no matter where you put it.
It’s true that 2010 was not his best season. He hit .238 / .316 / .468. But he’s still 29, at the statistical prime of his career. Most likely he just had a down season. Even in a down season, he still hit more home runs than anyone else in an Angels uniform. Plus, he’s healthy.
Also at catcher, you’ve got a stiff with a .199 career batting average. Even if he does play excellent defense, which no one here is willing to concede, he’s much too bad at hitting to have any value. Then you’ve got a 28 year-old journeyman with 119 PA to his name, and a 23 year-old kid with serious defensive issues. Now what you’re telling me is that you need to have all three of those guys on your roster so badly that there’s no room for Mike Napoli.
Okay, so let’s assume with Mike Scioscia that Napoli isn’t a full-time catcher, for whatever reason. Maybe he’s only good for 250-300 PA behind the plate. So you have to find another 250-300 PA for him at 1B and DH.
Well, your starting 1B suffered a catastrophic ankle-break last season. He hasn’t set foot on a baseball field since May. How much are you willing to bet that he’ll be ready to report to Spring Training in February? Even if he does make it, how much do you expect from a guy with a rusty skills and a balky ankle? Sounds to me like you could use some serious insurance in case he can’t play every day, or any day.
Your back-up plan is a 25 year-old with 16 major-league PA. He had a nice season in AAA. His plate discipline is dangerously poor, but he looks like he deserves some playing time. We all know now that Trumbo worked out decently as Morales’s replacement. Let’s not overstate the case, though. He couldn’t get on base even 30% of the time, and he played injured for an entire month. No one knew any of this in January, yet somehow you’re assuming that it was obvious.
Meanwhile, Abreu can’t play the field any longer, so he’s pretty much a lock at DH. He’s 37 now, and going downhill fast. His power and batting average keep dropping, and you never know how healthy someone will be at 37. He’s certain to get on base, but his bat has lost so much of its sting that it probably won’t look very good at DH. Plus, he really can’t hit left-handers any more. He could really use a platoon partner.
Would a reasonable person just assume that Morales would be 100%, and that Trumbo would exceed expectations otherwise? You want to throw away a proven major-league hitter on that chance. You’re also happy with someone’s grandfather as your full-time DH.
In other words, this is what you’re telling us was reasonable to think back in January:
1. Mathis, Wilson, and Conger must all be on the roster. No way Napoli can get 250-300 PA here.
2. Morales is going to be totally healthy, and Trumbo will be just as good if he isn’t. No room for 100-150 PA here.
3. Bobby Abreu can still hit well enough to play at DH every day. No chance at 100-150 PA for a right-hander.
Not just one of these things. But all three of these things. In fact, you’re so sure about all three of these things that instead you’re willing to throw away a proven major-league hitter and commit yourself to a four-year, $86 million relationship with an aging, inconsistent outfielder.
Well, congratulations, then. You’re losing your job in September.
by Suboptimal on Oct 2, 2011 4:32 PM PDT up reply actions 6 recs
Perfection
Great post. Going position by position and looking at productivity and insurance options is a great way to plan ahead. It’s amazing how greatly the Angels/Reagins failed last year.
I hope that at least one of the many upcoming 2012 fanposts will take this approach to determining offseason adjustments, it just makes so much more sense than relying on a scout who says Aramis Ramirez is vastly superior to Alberto Callaspo.
by lightupthehalo29 on Oct 2, 2011 5:16 PM PDT up reply actions
You're twisting my words...
I simply pointed out some of the the circumstances surrounding the trade. I never said I was sure about any player’s future, nor did I say this is what I wanted.
No one here seems to have a clue about Napoli’s working relationship with Scioscia, which has been documented as being very pressing for Napoli.
And with that, no one here can give me a thorough explanation as to why it took until 2010 (age 28) for Napoli to get significant playing time with his so-called valuable bat!!!
There are some who genuinely liked Napoli, but there are some who refuse to let him go, and who also refuse to believe the circumstances surrounding his trade, or just simply don’t know them.
Whatever.
The fact is: he is gone. It’s been almost a year now.
Other moves could have been made for depth. Scioscia said all along this offense needs depth. Napoli was not depth until he was with the Rangers, and even those numbers are skewed.
There are plenty of players out there. Mike Napoli is not that good of a player to be dwelling so much on.
That’s just how I think and feel about the guy. You like Napoli and want him back. That’s your thing.
I’m just stating my case.
The reason Mike Napoli did not get "significant" playing time until 2010
Is the same reason Jeff Mathis is still on a major league roster. I thought that was pretty clear to most people.
And here’s a ranking of our 2010 hitters by oWAR (Torii 3.8, Bobby 2.6, Napoli 2.2 (3rd best hitter on the team).
And as to Napoli’s “skewed numbers” this year, he actually hit slightly better on the road (.332/.414/.663/1.078) than at home (.307/.414/.597/1.011).
Napoli didn’t just suddenly get good in Texas — he finally realized his potential and was given a chance to succeed.
by linkbruin on Oct 2, 2011 5:38 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I simply pointed out some of the the circumstances surrounding the trade. I never said I was sure about any player’s future, nor did I say this is what I wanted.
Yes, you did. To wit: “Morales was projected to return as well when that deal was made, and Trumbo was ready to come and fill in if Morales needed days off. And look what Trumbo ended up bringing…Conger and Wilson were ready to move forward, and Napoli didn’t work hard enough to take the catcher’s job in the first place.”
No one here seems to have a clue about Napoli’s working relationship with Scioscia, which has been documented as being very pressing for Napoli.
Everything was reported on this site and discussed and discussed and discussed and discussed. We now have conclusive evidence that Mike Napoli is, like, really damn good. He functions really well on a team that is not Rura Penthe for catchers. If someone screwed up the relationship between him and Scioscia, it wasn’t Napoli.
And with that, no one here can give me a thorough explanation as to why it took until 2010 (age 28) for Napoli to get significant playing time with his so-called valuable bat!!!
See above. If you want something more thorough, dig through some of the links above. You’ll find that we’ve been talking about it for years.
There are some who genuinely liked Napoli, but there are some who refuse to let him go, and who also refuse to believe the circumstances surrounding his trade, or just simply don’t know them.
We know the circumstances surrounding the trade. We know what the Angels believed they were doing. We just think it was really, really stupid. You’re not going to change anyone’s mind just by rehashing the same bad arguments.
Especially when we’re watching the Rangers on TBS, and not the Angels, because of two trades involving Mike Napoli.
by Suboptimal on Oct 2, 2011 6:47 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I'm not trying to change people's minds...
Still never said I was certain of any player’s future, nor if that’s what I wanted.
It has been documented that Napoli never met Scioscia’s expectations.
I’ll take a player who played more than 140 games before the age of 28 over Napoli. 2011 was one big year out of 6.
There are many other (better) players out there.
If Napoli never met Scioscia's expectations
It’s because Scioscia’s expectations are screwed up. He keeps seeing enough “potential” inside Jeff Mathis to try him out all over again every season, and yet he couldn’t recognize a good, possibly great player already on his roster? Right now, Scioscia’s reputation as a “catcher’s manager” looks like all so much bullshit.
You have all of this backwards. Napoli wasn’t bad for the Angels because he realized his potential only after leaving them. The Angels were bad for Napoli. Napoli may be gone, but the problem might still remain. This is why we’re so bent out of shape about it.
by Suboptimal on Oct 2, 2011 7:37 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Are Bill James' expectations screwed up?
On January 22, 2011 he wrote:
Napoli certainly has upside as a hitter, and there have been times in the past when I liked him a lot. He’s a frustrating player; he’s an awful defensive catcher, and it’s not really clear that he can stay at that position, so then he HAS to hit to stay in the lineup.
That's a lot more reasonable than dumping him for Vernon Wells so that Jeff Mathis can get more playing time
by Suboptimal on Oct 2, 2011 8:09 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
You're forgetting his injured wrist that was obviously the cause of his offensive struggles.
Just give him another couple years for that to heal and you’ll see!
I think Bill James' expectations here are screwed up, yes
It happens now and then when even really smart people look at something from a distance. Joe Posnanski (sic), a writer I really enjoy, had a long piece late this spring about how awful it was going to be to watch Vernon Wells play center field this year.
James probably looked at Scioscia’s reluctance to play Napoli at catcher as strong evidence for Napoli’s deficiency at the position. You can see how he got there, but it doesn’t mean he was right.
But it's not only Bill James
27 major league organizations had the opportunity to acquire Napoli if they offered more than Frank Francisco. I think it’s reasonable to assume that Napoli was on the market a long time, especially considering the Boston waiver claim that came to naught at the end of the 2010 season. 27 teams were aware Napoli was available. If James was wrong, so were 29 out of 30 MLB organizations.
Of course it happens, Jose Bautista being the most recent example.
LazorkoRules posted a link to a Yahoo news feature about Naps after yesterday's ALDS game.
In that article you can read Michael Young speaking about Napoli’s reputation, particularly as a defender, and how that reputation turned out to be “bull”.
I would submit that Napoli did not, himself, garner that reputation so much as it was volunteered upon him by others in the Angels organization (the usual suspects).
All those other teams were taking Scioscia’s word for it because, after all, he is Mike Scioscia and he is right there deeply involved in the situation.
So, to Matt’s point, everybody (not just Bill James) start to focus on the meme and ignore the facts.
I can only imagine that there are 28 teams, and 29 owners, who are kicking themselves right now because they let Napoli slip through their fingers.
Against stupidity the very Gods themselves toil in vain.
by Stirrups on Oct 4, 2011 10:14 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Rec'd for 28 teams and 29 owners comment.
Vernon Wells 2011 Stats (.218/.248/.412) and 2010 road stats (.224/.299/.400). The front office shouldn't have been surprised.
By the way, as an aside
Shouldn’t Toronto be making a similar list for their role in The Trade Part II? I mean, they could have certainly found 400 PA’s for Napoli as well. It’s almost like they won the lottery then squandered half of it in their drunken stupor.
Not that we really care, but still…
"There's nothing that cleanses your soul like getting the hell kicked out of you." - Woody Hayes
by johnnyangel101 on Oct 2, 2011 10:31 PM PDT up reply actions
Napoli was a blockade in the development plan
His performance this year hurts a little, but really it wouldn’t have gotten us to the playoffs. Instead they got the playing time to Arencibia and Molina at C and Encarnacion at DH to build for the future, which has seen marked development from Arencibia and Encarnacion, and Molina making it to type-B status for the end of his contract.
Means for this year we have two type-B picks in the draft coming up from the deal, which lets us trade off a little more prospect talent this offseason without killing the farm, and means the actual long term residents of the team have had the chance to develop a year more. If we’re real lucky, Encarnacion has another hot year when we pick up his $3.5million club option, and we may yet get a 3rd type-B out of the deal, but that would be counting chickens.
Napoli was a great piece, but a square peg for a round hole at the wrong time in the Jays development schedule.
by TtD on Oct 3, 2011 6:28 AM PDT up reply actions
Makes it seem even more likely that the Angels just foisted Napoli on the Jays
TR’s idea of “salary relief.”
That just shows how dumb Reagins is.
Even if Napoli was worthless and we needed get out from under his salary obligation, he could have been non-tendered. Offering him arbitration and then dumping him as a salary dump is just like signing a free agent and then salary dumping him the next week.
Vernon Wells 2011 Stats (.218/.248/.412) and 2010 road stats (.224/.299/.400). The front office shouldn't have been surprised.
Morales, Trumbo, and Abreu were not mentioned, because this was a post about trading Mike Napoli and Juan Rivera for Vernon Wells
But they are factors
Because at the time the trade was made there was very limited playing time projected for Napoli due to Morales projected to return and Abreu projected to be full time DH. A log jam was being created at C. And that could be source material for also mentioning better deals for Napoli and Rivera, such as a closer, etc.
Because at the time the trade was made there was very limited playing time projected for Napoli due to Morales projected to return and Abreu projected to be full time DH.
Source please? I think you pulled this one from the place that gives birth to flying monkeys. Who’s projection?
Even if it’s accurate,that’s a steaming pile of flawed projection given;
- The seriousness of Morales’ injury. The “projector” in this case seems not to have learned one bit from Rivera’s similar (and recent) injury.
- Napoli started as catcher 77 games in 2006, 68 in 2007, 71 in 2008, 84 in 2009, and 59 in 2010 (it likely would have been higher in 2010 if Morales hadn’t broken his leg).Why in the hell would you “project” in January,2011 that he would catch less?
- Scioscia was bound to have Abreu play some outfield (he started 16 games in the OF in 2011).
Beyond all of that, what is your point? Angels management screwed up and became active and willing participants in one of the most uneven, lop-sided trades in recent memory. There’s no “projecting” obfuscating, rationalizing, or explaining that will change this basic fact.
so...
you’re on the short list of GM candidates, right Matt?
Thank you, Nick Adenhart. You will always be remembered. #34
Your analysis of Napoli is 100 percent wrong.
Claiming he didnt work hard enough to compete with conger and wilson is ludicrous. From what i have read, Napoli ranks among the top of the league which is where his so called “need-for-improvement” was needed. His framing of pitches ranked well ahead of Mathis and the halo battery crew. As of now, Wilson hasnt stepped up and is just barely an improvement of Mathis. Conger is deserving of a shot but I would have gladly traded him were Napoli still with us.
Napoli would have been a dangerous weapon in the lineup, one that would have surely won us the Wild Card if not the West.
From no where I read stated that Napoli changed workout regiments or “stepped it up” He has always been the beast he was this year. The reason his cERA is improved over previous years is because of who he is catching, not him. As most of us recall he caught Pineiro, Kazmir, and Santana. Not to bash on Pinata or Santana, I love to watch them, but they arent of the caliber that Haren and Weaver are (at least not last year, Santana is making his case stronger every outing). Nobody could expect a decent CERA out of that. His improvement is much more based on his utilization instead of his personal stepping up.
You cant say he didnt work hard either. He went into a position he had never played before or had little experience in 2010 and emerged with a new position under his belt. He improved on his defense and WORKED so hard that he supplied acceptable defense, that I would even compare to our full time first baseman, Trumbo.
People are right to dwell on the trading of Napoli, it was the worst trade in recent history. Losing a player the caliber of Napoli is crushing to an organization and crushing to the fanbase. Most of us can easily agree Napoli was one of if not the best catchers in the game currently. Better than Avila, Yadier, Mauer.
Alas, we should indeed rejoice on the firing of Reagins and should pray for the return of Napoli next off-season. He is a true game changer, definitely on e of the best Halos of recent times.
" With Haren bolstering the rotation, the Angels are set up beautifully for 2011"- Another East coast biased reporter
Reply Fail.
" With Haren bolstering the rotation, the Angels are set up beautifully for 2011"- Another East coast biased reporter
by Halos2011champs on Oct 2, 2011 1:33 PM PDT up reply actions
Real solid work, Matt
From Jeff Mathis' TOPPS card: "Jeff is a defensive catcher, but he can rake it when it counts." Jeff has a lifetime .199 MLB batting average
Wow....that's the kind of failure that.....
…..might get someone fired……FINALLY !!!!!!
nice post, and good to see Halowood finally was able to get back on here under an alias
Ryan Krol
"You realize that Ive been posting on AN since 07 on this name and I am one of the most rec'ed posters there right?" - Some tool named Designatedforassignment from Athletics Nation
As a hilarious side note, Halowood is apparently writing for Bleacher Report now.
What a perfect fit.
I made a new friend with this post.
and his name rhymes with Troll.
" With Haren bolstering the rotation, the Angels are set up beautifully for 2011"- Another East coast biased reporter
by Halos2011champs on Oct 3, 2011 3:00 PM PDT up reply actions
I am still not a buyer on the "Wells Blocked Trout, But Rivera Would Not Block Trout" theory.
It is complete conjecture to state that Trout would have displaced Rivera in LF. And this conjecture is in defiance of Scioscia’s past deference to his established position players.
While it may make absolute sense to us fans, and somewhat substantiated in hindsight given what Trout was able to reveal as promise at the MLB level, I don’t see Sosh suddenly changing his mind on the value of that level of production he had been getting out of Rivera in LF and handing that role over to what would still be a 19 year old.
Against stupidity the very Gods themselves toil in vain.
Scioscia's past deference was to established position players WITH FAT CONTRACTS
He gave Scott Spiezio and Darin Erstad 63 starts in DH in 2000, out of deference to Mo Vaughn saying he preferred to play the field. He deferred to Garret Anderson, to Steve Finley (until the playoffs), to Vernon Wells. He did NOT defer (ever) to Juan Rivera, Adam Kennedy, or Mike Napoli. I think some of it was contract, some of it was just people he never really trusted, but I have no doubt that he would have had a much itchier trigger finger with Juan Rivera (who he benched for huge stretches of 2006, for no good reason) than with Vernon Wells, who does not deserve to be in a starting major league lineup.
I am still not seeing it.
The "Juan Rivera (who he benched for huge stretches of 2006, for no good reason) just doesn’t ring so differetn compared to the Wells we know so far.
Rivera played in 124 games that season (2006), with one stint on the 15 day DL. That is pretty close to the 131 games Wells saw action in during 2011, and with a similar single 15 day DL trip.
In fact, except for late 2007 and then 2008, immediately after his traumatic leg injury, a healthy Rivera played between the low of 106 games (in his first year on the team, 2005) and a high of 138 games (in 2009). It would seem to me that any story used for Rivera not playing those other 30 – 40 games should be pretty close to the story used for Wells not playing those other 30 – 40 games. If you have two guys putting up similar numbers, and both playing a similar amount of games, logic suggests that if the story used for one is “benched…for no good reason”, the story to be applied to the other should be “benched…for no good reason”.
Against stupidity the very Gods themselves toil in vain.
Anyone remember Lymon Bostock?
He was aquired by the Angels for the ‘78 season, but when he played poorly the first month (batted something like .150 for the month of April) he tried to give back that month’s salary.
Vernon, are you reading this?
I meant the OTHER Howard!
I believe union rules prohibited it, and Mr. Autry wouldn't take it.
If I recall correctly, Bostock and Mr. Autry agreed that he would donate it to charity instead.
If the Halos don't care about the way they play, then why should I?
The loss of Bostock remain haunting to this day.....
From Jeff Mathis' TOPPS card: "Jeff is a defensive catcher, but he can rake it when it counts." Jeff has a lifetime .199 MLB batting average
Oh man
First off, Ryan Krol, thank you so much. We have been missing the “drunk retarded village idiot” persona around here for quite some time. I relish absolutely destroying your baseball arguments, logic, self esteem, and views on life in general in the near future.
Secondly, Napoli was traded because he was viewed as a potentially expensive backup to Mathis. Napoli was seen as a backup because Sosh is unable to develop the catching position with any sort of effectiveness, makes poor emotion based decisions when dealing with catchers, and effectively has proven that will not change.
The worst trade is possibly the history of baseball was because we have an idiot, backwards thinking GM/manager. Napoli should have never been viewed as a backup in the first place and seen as expendable.
I brought sexy back, but they only gave me store credit....

by 






























