Latest Headlines on OCRegister.com
[x] Close
Angels blog ~ The latest on the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim, by the Orange County Register Sports staff

Author Archive

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »

Angels reportedly ‘interested’ in top free agent Holliday

November 16th, 2009, 10:11 am by Sam Miller, The Orange County Register

Fox Sports’ Jon Paul Morosi says Matt Holliday will end up with either the Yankees, the Red Sox or the Angels, and that the Angels are interested. * He also concludes that the Curtis Granderson rumors will only help one of those teams drive down Holliday’s price:

“All three GMs can tell Boras that they are also shopping in a trade market that suddenly includes Detroit’s Curtis Granderson, who has played left field in the past and would probably be willing to do so again.

“A robust trade market could harm Boras’ leverage, but he will be in command again if Bay, represented by Joe Urbon, signs before Holliday.”

If the Angels do sign Holliday, it will either mean payroll is going to go up or that someone — Mike Napoli? Juan Rivera? Maicer Izturis? — will be traded.

I earlier ranked Holliday the most helpful free agent available to the Angels, despite what many consider an unsuccessful stint in the AL last year. It’s true that his April was a disaster — a .622 OPS and zero home runs through his first 17 games with the A’s. After that, though, he hit .300/.400/.480 in the 75 games before he was traded to the Cardinals. The defensive metric UZR loves him in left field, averaging 10 runs above average there over the past three seasons. He’s been one of the 15 most valuable everyday players in each of the past three seasons, by Wins Above Replacement. He’s still only 29, younger than Bay, Figgins and the other top free agent hitters.

But if they Angels sign him — and especially if they can’t shed payroll elsewhere — we should probably assume (for now, at least) that they won’t have money to sign anybody else. That leaves a core of:

C. Napoli/Mathis

1B. Morales

2B. Kendrick/Izturis

SS. Aybar

3B. Wood

LF. Holliday

CF. Hunter

RF. Rivera

DH. Abreu

SP: Weaver, Santana, Kazmir, Saunders, Bell/Palmer/O’Sullivan

RP: Everybody returns

The outfield defense is better, the infield defense a bit worse. More power, less speed. A slightly weaker rotation than the Angels had for much of the year, but a worse rotation than they had in October.

Almost certainly, that’s a team that wins 90+ games and makes October. But do you think it’s better or worse than the 2009 unit? And, is it good enough to make you feel confident the Angels can win three rounds in the postseason?

*Worth noting that Holliday is represented by Scott Boras, which will make some skeptical of any reports of teams’ interest. There is also this.

Posted in: Angels | 8 Comments »

Surprise! Yankees may be Lackey longshot

November 14th, 2009, 11:43 am by Sam Miller, The Orange County Register

ESPN’s Buster Olney handicaps the pursuit of John Lackey and puts the Angels second, behind the Mariners. He puts the Yankees sixth out of six teams, and leaves the Rangers off the list entirely.

He writes:

If I were to set an early handicap on the upcoming Lackey sweepstakes, I’d throw out an educated guess on the rankings, from top to bottom, that looks like this:

  • Mariners
  • Angels
  • Brewers
  • Mets
  • Red Sox
  • Yankees

The Mariners have a lot of payroll flexibility and a clear strategy predicated on strong pitching and defense.

The Red Sox, Brewers and Rangers have already spoken to Lackey’s agent. The Angels reportedly offered $72 million earlier this year, which Lackey rejected. The Yankees had been presumed to be interested, and last year the Yankees got the three big stars they targeted: The top hitter on the market and the top two pitchers. While an early handicap doesn’t mean much, this hints that the Yankees might not be  showing much interest in Lackey.

Previously:

Posted in: John Lackey | 2 Comments »

Friday links: Salary-stealing, sign-stealing, HR-stealing

November 13th, 2009, 11:15 am by Sam Miller, The Orange County Register

• Jorge Says No asks “What the hell were you thinking,” the Gary Matthews, Jr. edition. He quotes Bill Stoneman at the time:

“ In addition to his outstanding play in center field, he has the versatility to leadoff …”

I’ll wait for you to quit laughing.

• Brent Mayne emails Buster Olney about sign-stealing, and while the whole thing is illuminating, this is the cherry:

“Remind me sometime later to tell you the story of the game I caught with no signs. I caught one whole game where the pitchers just threw whatever they wanted and I just reacted (we thought, and I think we were correct, that the other team had cameras). Surprisingly, it wasn’t that difficult.”

• Sabermetrics is in the Merriam-Webster dictionary. (H/T Beyond the Box Score)

• UmpBump asks what Chone Figgins’ value is, and brings up a good point:

“Another aspect of Figgins’ reputation that I personally feel is overvalued is his versatility. Is there value to this? Absolutely … But is Figgins really that player? Or is it essentially a myth that continues to be propagated? “

• Will Carroll charts each team’s days and salary lost to injuries. The Angels had one of the worst Aprils any of us have ever seen, but by the end of the season they ranked just 18th in days lost. A credit to their training staff?

• And it’s way premature to start thinking about this, but if Curtis Granderson and Torii Hunter are teammates next year, I hope they’ll start a friendly homerun-stealing competition:

YouTube Preview Image

Posted in: Angels | Post a Comment »

Olney: Lackey turned down $72 million

November 13th, 2009, 10:35 am by Sam Miller, The Orange County Register

Remember a few days ago when we heard that the Angels offered John Lackey a seemingly low three years, $36 million during the spring? Buster Olney just tweeted that their final offer to Lackey this season was much higher, $72 million. No word on how many years that is. If it was four years, it seems too high per annum. If it was six years, it seems too low. And since $72 million isn’t divisible by five, that just looks wrong. (I’d bet on six, though.)

Posted in: John Lackey | 86 Comments »

Juan Rivera’s base instincts

November 13th, 2009, 10:11 am by Sam Miller, The Orange County Register

I mentioned earlier than the new Bill James Handbook* rates Juan Rivera the worst baserunner in baseball 2009, at about 40 total bases lost compared to the average player. Here’s how it breaks down, compared to an excellent baserunner, Chone Figgins (+35) and a slow, but more effective, baserunner, Mike Napoli (+7). (Overall, the Angels were second-best in baseball.)

Going first-to-third:

  • Figgins, 23 out of 43 chances (53 percent)
  • Napoli, 10 out of 24 chances (42 percent)
  • Rivera, 8 out of 29 (28 percent)

Scoring from second on a single:

  • Figgins, 26 of 31 (84 percent)
  • Napoli, 13 of 16, (81 percent)
  • Rivera, 6 of 14 (43 percent)

Scoring from first on XBH:

  • Figgins, 9 of 14 (64 percent)
  • Napoli, 2 of 7 (29 percent)
  • Rivera, 1 of 8 (13 percent)

Bases taken (on WP, PB, balks, Sac. flies and defensive indifference)

  • Figgins, 29
  • Napoli, 6
  • Rivera, 10

Baserunning outs:

  • Figgins, 8
  • Napoli, 1
  • Rivera, 10

Grounded into double plays:

  • Figgins, 8 out of 117 (7 percent)
  • Napoli, 6 out of 84 (7 percent)
  • Rivera, 19 of 107 (18 percent)

James notes that Rivera’s damage isn’t due to his poor speed, but because is aggressive in spite of it. Raul Ibanez is slow, too, but he made just one out on the bases this year. Same with Adam Dunn, Garret Anderson, Casey Kotchman. Jeff Mathis (+3) made none. James writes,

“Almost 100 years ago, Ping Bodie was caught stealing and Bugs Baer wrote that ‘he had larceny in his heart, but his feet were honest.’ Rivera tried to play the game the way his teammates played it, stealing a run here and there, but he has honest feet.”

*Book was provided to the Register free-of-charge by ACTA Publishing

Posted in: Juan Rivera | 2 Comments »

Red Sox also meet with Lackey camp

November 13th, 2009, 9:05 am by Sam Miller, The Orange County Register

So says the Boston Herald. That’s three teams that have actually met with him, and three others who have been linked to him, in addition to the Angels.

Lackey is clearly the best pitcher available, but you know what’s odd?

  • Lackey, 2008-2009: 340 innings, 3.79 ERA, 4.10 FIP, 118 ERA+
  • Randy Wolf, 2008-2009: 405 innings, 3.76 ERA, 4.07 FIP, 120 ERA+

And have you seen anyone (other than the Brewers) linked to Wolf yet?

Previously:

Posted in: John Lackey | 2 Comments »

No Phiggins after all?

November 13th, 2009, 8:50 am by Sam Miller, The Orange County Register

Some half-truths for a Friday morning:

• Jayson Stark writes that the Phillies — previously rumored to be one of three teams in pursuit of Chone Figgins — are more likely to sign a third baseman from the second tier of options. Figgins is sort of the anti-Lackey in this year’s market, as there have been surprisingly few teams attached to him. The Orioles, for instance, are rumored to be after a good half-dozen third basemen (not a half-dozen good third basemen, though) and no Figgins. Could it be as simple as teams wanting a “traditional” third baseman? Because that’s nuts. Runs are runs. So maybe it’s because he has been terrible in two of the past four seasons.

The Mets, incidentally, are “absolutely in” on Figgins. Again, though, he wouldn’t be a third baseman.  Figgins was the best defensive third baseman in baseball by the plus/minus system, and near the top by UZR.

• Larry Stone of the Seattle Times says he “believes” that the Mariners will pursue Lackey, and notes that Mariners manager Don Wakamatsu managed Lackey in A-ball.

• Jim Thome calls Chicago home, suggesting he might like to return there. If he signs with the White Sox, Vladimir Guerrero loses one more possible destination. The more I look at all the DH options and the few buyers, the more I think Vlad’s future comes down to Milton Bradley. If the Rangers trade for him, the Angels will get Guerrero back for cheap. If they don’t, they’ll sign Vlad. (No actual knowledge went into that assessment.)

Posted in: Angels • Chone Figgins | 3 Comments »

We have a winner in the ‘collusion’ pool

November 13th, 2009, 8:44 am by Sam Miller, The Orange County Register

If you guessed it would take eight days before the players’ union began whispering about collusion charges, you’re a winner.

Posted in: Angels | Post a Comment »

Report: Angels discussed Granderson trade

November 13th, 2009, 8:10 am by Sam Miller, The Orange County Register

Newsday reports (h/t MLB Trade Rumors) that the Angels and Tigers have discussed a trade involving Curtis Granderson.

“ The Angels are interested in playing Granderson in leftfield and either tradingJuan Rivera or moving him to designated hitter.”

If anyone should be moved to designated hitter, it’s Bobby Abreu, but that would be a small issue easily worked out in spring training. Granderson might look enticing as a leadoff man to replace Chone Figgins, but beyond his speedy reputation he’s not a great replacement — a .344 career OBP and a game that is increasingly centered around power as he ages through his peak years. He’s been a pretty good defensive centerfielder for most of his career, and might turn out to be a dominant defensive left-fielder.

Granderson and Rivera were worth about the same amount in 2009, by Wins Above Replacement, but Granderson is younger, has a better health and performance record, and fits the Angels’ style a bit better. (Juan Rivera was the worst baserunner in the league in 2009, according to the new Bill James Handbook.) He’s signed for the next three years for a total of $26 million, while Juan Rivera has two years and about $9.5 million left on his contract.

Adding Granderson would make the Angels better. Adding him and trading Juan Rivera would probably make them better, too, enough to justify the difference in their contracts. The question, then, will involve how much the Angels have to give up.

Posted in: Angels • Juan Rivera | 32 Comments »

Rangers eye Vlad

November 13th, 2009, 7:49 am by Sam Miller, The Orange County Register

The Rangers are interested in Vladimir Guerrero, according to Ken Rosenthal’s blog.

Guerrero, 34, ultimately might command only a one-year deal in the range of $3 million to $5 million, plus incentives. But the Angels’ signing of right fielder Bobby Abreu to a two-year, $19 million free-agent contract raised Guerrero’s expectations, according to a source with knowledge of his thinking.

It isn’t clear why Abreu’s contract should affect Guerrero’s thinking at all. Abreu was a considerably better hitter than Guerrero in 2009, he was healthier, and he was able to play the field. While Vlad is a year younger (we think), Abreu’s 2009 showed he’s not in the middle of a steep aging curve. Guerrero’s 2009 — performance plus injuries — hints that he is.

Unfortunately for Guerrero, a better comparison still remains Abreu’s 2009 contract, a one-year, $5 million deal with some small incentives. In 2008, Abreu’s defense collapsed, from “poor” to “Adam Dunn” according to some advanced metrics. At that point, it was fair to question whether Abreu’s age was an issue, as well as whether he’d be able to handle another full season in the field. He countered those fears with a very good season, including improvement on the field and base paths, and his new contract reflects that. Guerrero, though, is not at Abreu’s present state; he hasn’t disproven anything.

Vladimir Guerrero could be this year’s Abreu: Rejuvenated, quite valuable and way underpaid. In which case, Abreu’s contract should raise his expectations for what he’ll earn next winter. Until then, the better comps are Jim Thome and Carlos Delgado.

Posted in: Angels • Vladimir Guerrero | Post a Comment »

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »