|By Adam H. Wong||By 12-18-2012|
|1. By: Paul Martin on 12-18-2012 20:11:31|
Nice article Adam! Graphs made me a bit dizzy trying to follow them all! Angels aren't winning ANYTHING until they get some more pitching. Would give anything to have a passionate and free spending owner like Arte Moreno though...
|2. By: Lonnie on 12-18-2012 21:16:16|
The Angles pulled off this deal for two reasons. One was in fact to win now, but the other, which was equally important, was to stick a thumb into the eye of the Dodgers. The Angles and Dodgers are in a fight for supremacy of greater Los Angeles market and both sides are willing to dole out the big bucks to take the crown. Whoever wins hearts of the market will have the larger fanbase (ie: money) going forward. Otherwise, no sane person would be throwing this kind of money around.
|3. By: Jason A. Churchill on 12-18-2012 23:04:00|
While that's true, Lonnie -- as is the idea that LAA took a player away from their toughest division rival -- it doesn't change the facts laid out by Adam in the least.
The only thing that saves the Angels is the simple fact that they have money to cover up most bad contracts. That doesn't mean, however, that the Angels won't privately regret the signing if Hamilton's career takes the angle the above chart suggests. Those last three years he's likely to be a full-time DH on top of the below league average OBPs.
The Yankees have proven, too, that all clubs have a tipping point. They still lead the majors, by a long shot, in total revenues generated and are still adamant about the luxury tax in 2014 and its benefits for their future immediately following.
With Pujols and Hamilton both potentially being bad contracts in a few years, it could prevent the Angels from some things down the road, including things they would not need in three years if they aren't paying Hamilton $25 million to be a 2 WAR player.
On top of how this could impact the Angels, the Mariners' may have missed out on the benefits of signing Hamilton, but they also avoid the potential dangers of giving him $125 million guaranteed. The Mariners cannot absorb contracts in the same manner.
|4. By: Jazz00 on 12-19-2012 06:39:09|
Adam, I really needed this analysis. Though I felt the Angels overpaid for Hamilton I really wanted us to get his bat and I was disgusted for a day or two when we didn't get him. But the longer time has passed I realized he just wasn't worth it at the cost the Angels went to and your analysis has helped me get over it. Thanks for information.
|5. By: Docmilo on 12-19-2012 07:35:15|
Jason, Lonnie said the Angels were competing with the Dodgers not their toughest division rival. It's all about market share not the AL West.
Bringing up the fact that Hamilton would end up a DH would make sense that the Angels are rumored to be looking to move Morales more than Trumbo or Bourjos. Keep the young outfielders (and Trumbo can play 1st) and rotating Hamilton and Pujols thru the DH spot as much as possible will keep the old guys fresh.
As far as the ability to absorb contracts? If the M's were putting 35,000 butts in the seats every night, how would that impact their ability to absorb a contract of this nature?
|6. By: rth1986 on 12-19-2012 08:30:23|
Reading Rosenthal's piece about the Mariners re-sparked my irrational hope for the Mariners to acquire Stanton.
Do you think a package of Montero, Walker, Franklin + 1 decent MLB piece (maybe Carp or Beavan) would get it done? That's a pretty big haul, in my opinion, and could potentially give the Marlins three above-average players under team control for a long time.
Stanton would just fit so well...
|7. By: Edman on 12-19-2012 09:16:17|
rth1986, you need to start thinking logically. Unless Seattle is willing to give up Felix, Stanton isn't coming to Seattle. They are not going to sell low on him.
|8. By: Marco on 12-19-2012 09:29:11|
"The Angles pulled off this deal for two reasons. One was in fact to win now..."
Not a bad idea to TRY TO WIN sometimes. Actually I do not need any further reason.
|9. By: maqman on 12-19-2012 11:23:06|
I'm in the "glad the M's didn't sign him" camp too, for all of the reasons stated. Without Trout the LAAofA crew would be in serious trouble in 2 or 3 years. Imagine what they could have bought if they had left Wells in Toronto. Imagine Toronto being in position to win the AL East if they still were paying Wells. Albatross contracts are serious;y dangerous. The Yankees are going to have some heavy issues to deal with in coming seasons related to the age, cost and production from their Over The Hill Gang. I really believe the M's are doing the right thing by being cautious and building a young and sustainable team. That doesn't preclude them from spending millions on free agents if the cost is right and the risk is reasonable.
There's a SS and OF from Cuba, aged 22 and 24 recently cleared to be signed by MLB that might be worth a look.
|10. By: rjfrik on 12-19-2012 12:41:05|
So the Angels are actively shopping Morales for a pitcher who eats innings. My guess is they are looking for a back of rotation starter who will log 200 innings. Is it just me or is Vargas a perfect.t ade partner? We could grab a great.bat in Morales, make him an offer after next year, if he declines and bolts we get a comp pick. Then fill Vargas spot with a FA like Jackson or Marcum. Seems like JZ should be all over this.
|11. By: marinermutt on 12-19-2012 13:14:32|
Would the Angels want to trade in their same division? Morales has much more perceived value than Vargas so the M's would have to throw in more. Probably a lot more.
Would love to have Morales but I just don't see the Angels sending him off to us.
|12. By: Rudolf on 12-19-2012 13:40:59|
Totally agree, rjfrik. Who knows, maybe they would prefer Blake Beaven. It's not like we're serious competition for them anyways so trading in division doesn't seem like a big deal.
As much as I'd like to see the Angels crumble beneath the weight of an overpaid aging lineup I just don't see it happening. When your payroll is 150 million you can afford to have two guys making $25 million producing two WAR apiece. And it's not like they can't increased the payroll up to 170 million if they need to! Their market is enormous and their owner likes to spend money. Wishing for their franchise to buckle is futile in my opinion.
Our best plan to best the Angels is to build a team with a dominant pitching staff. That's all you really need to beat anybody. between Felix and the hope of our big four we have the makings of that pitching staff. I would like to think Jack knows when it's time to buy the right piece. Apparently now is not that time (or the piece isn't there).
|13. By: skyway park on 12-19-2012 14:11:49|
We just traded Vargas for Morales yes yes yes
|14. By: VikingArthur on 12-19-2012 14:22:01|
Great trade, I am very happy with it. I think we need JAC to explain what this means for the Smoak, Montero, Jaso and crew.
|15. By: VikingArthur on 12-19-2012 14:24:42|
I also wonder what the plan is for someone to take those 34 starts Vargas took. I really think this is the first domino for the Mariners in terms of their offseason plan. More moves to come, I am sure of it.
|16. By: Wishhiker on 12-19-2012 14:24:49|
Yeah, nice call on that. looks like a good move to me and it happened pretty shortly after you suggested it.
|17. By: masonb on 12-19-2012 14:27:41|
And now JZ can scream at the media: "Are you not entertained?"
|18. By: rjfrik on 12-19-2012 16:56:44|
Lol. Thats crazy. I'm on set all day today away from internet, had a chance to browse briefly earlier so I stopped.by the site to give my two cents and then have another brief break and checked back by to see what you guys thought. Low and behold! JZ is a smart guy ;)
|19. By: greentunic on 12-19-2012 19:50:39|
"The number of strikeouts he had in 2012 increased almost 50 percent, jumping to 162 strikeouts from 93 in 2011."
Isn't that actually a much higher jump at 74%?
162 - 93 = 69
69 / 93 = .7419
What am I missing?
|Copyright 2013 Prospect Insider, Inc. | Created by AQ Central|
Prospect Insider is optimized for Mozilla Firefox and Google Chrome